R.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XV, Issue 4356, 28 February 1893, Page 3

R.M. COURT.

MASTERTON.-TUESDAY. (Deforo Colonel Roborts, R.M.) Searl and Johansen v, C. E. Major. Claim £25. Mr Pownall for plaintiffs and Mr Bunny for defendant. Tlie case aroso out of a transaction in respect of tho purchase of the Commercial Hotel, Hawera, for which plaintiffs had deposited the sum of £IOO. Tho purchaso fell through and defendant returned £75, retaining £25 for expenses incurred on account of the incompleted purchase. Argument was made by defendant's counsel that the Court had no jurisdiction. His Worship stated that tho money having been paid in Masterton ho considered tlm Court had jurisdiction. E. J. Senrl, one of the plaintiffs, was examined and explained that after communications with Divan Bros, ho wont to Hawera nod saw Major, to whom ho was recommended by Dwan Bros, as being their agent in respect of hotel properties in that locality. Mr Pownall produced tho letters of Messrs Dwan and tendered them us evidence.

Mr liunny requested His Worship to make note that ho objected to tho letters of Dwan Bros as evidence against his client, Witness continuing said that defendant Imd not made any mention of commission when the agreement to purchase was made. There was nothing mentioned in the agreement about the amount ot goodwill. The bill given to Major for £250 was to represent half the stock of the hotel. Did not recognise defendant to be acting us agent for witness in any way. Subsequently witness had received telegrams from Dwan Bros, and Major stating that Hudson, owner of the property, objected to witness as a tenant, and also ti letter stating that the transaction would have to be withdrawn on account of the Star" affair. Defendant never made any claim on witness for commission until the refund of the £25 retained was asked for by witness. Defendant now claimed this money on account of witness making such statement in respect of his position that caused default in the purchase being completed. Had not mado any statement that was not true, nor did he ever have his licenso endorsed. What Major asked was whether ho (witness) bad heen convicted of any offence in respect of any license ho hud previously held. By Mr Bunny: The bargain to purchase was mado with defendant, Did not say that he could get references as to his being a satisfactory person, but that as far as tho money was concerned witness stated ho could get references from various parties, mentioning the Brewery Company Wellington, Castendyl'O and Focko, and tho Mayor of Masterton, Witness' solicitor had written a full explanation of the Star cases to Mr Hudson, Mr Howard never asked the questions mentioned in Major's evidence. Johansen the other plaintiff gave coroborative evidence, Mr G. S. W. Dalrymple, land and commission agent, said that tho general custom was for vendors to pay agents commission, This was plaintiffs' caso, Mr Bunny, for defendant, claimed that Major was the agent of plaintiff and had a perfect right to have returned the whole of the deposit on account of tho misrepresentation made by the plaintiff, He maintained that the promissory note was given for the goodwill of the lease. The defendant knew and admitted in evidenco that there was a goodwill to bo paid for. Defendant claims to hold back this money as agent for the vendor, and this, counsel submitted, defendant had a perfeot right to do. Mr Major was a partner of Dwan Bros in the transaction, and they should also be parties to the

action. The evidenco taken in Hawera was read, Mr Pownall objected to the dofence set up tbat the agent could return a deposit. It was for tho vendor to do this. His Worship gave judgmont for plaintiff for amount claimed, with costs of Court 375, witness' expenses £3l9s 3d, and Counsel's fee JE4 4s,