Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT

Saturday, August 17. (Before J. Giles, Esq , K.M.) The fallowing ease, involving an important point in shipping transactions, was ] eird this day : —- "Robert C Parker v. Peter Duncan aTu! the owners of the barque Alma.— Claim for £l4 Gs., damages alleged to be sustained by reason of landing a shipment of 42 tons 4 cwt of potatoes upon the wharf and street at Westport in wet and unfit weather, and consequent depreciation thereof. Tjie plaintiff, in evidence, stated that while in Melbourne he had arranged with the owners of the vessel for a shipmeat of potatoes and other goods, at 40s per ton, under hatches. He had shipped 22 tons himself, in good order, and left the shipping of the rest to his agents there. On the arrival of the Alma at "Westport, the master, Peter Duncan, commenced to discharge part of the cargo, consisting of potatoes, which plaintiff did not then know to be his own, as he had bargained for shipment of all his freight under hatches. The weather was bad, and plaintiff had remonstrated with the agent and master against discharging ; hut they had replied they could not stop the work of tho vessel ; and the potatoes were landel, partly on the wharf and partly on the street. Plaintiff, acting under legal advice, had paid the freight, and afterwards caused a survey to be held on the hags, to assess damages caused by rain and exposure. By Captain Duncan: The potatoes were shipped in good condition. Cannot produce bill of lading, Received written notice to remove the potatoes at a quarter past five on Saturday. Had no store to place them in, but intended to tell them by auction upon the wharf.

By Court: The crow commenced discharging on the Friday morning, the day after arrival, before entries had been passed. It was then stormy weather. Tried to sell the potatoes by auction on Saturday, on the wharf, but could get no fair bid, as the bags were so wet. The potatoes placed on the stieet remained there until the following Thursday, as no drays could be obtained sooner to take them away. When no sale could be effected, had rented a place from Julea Simons to store the potatoes in. John Mnnro : Remembered a notice being sent by agent of the Alma to the plaintiff; that the potatoes were lying ou the,wharf at plaintiff's risk. This was about a quarter past five. Had at mid-day on Friday, inspected the bags ou the wharf. They were very wet. Could not sell them on Saturday by auction, as they were not in a marketable condition, and were them imperfectly covered. By Captain D mean : The weather on Friday mijht have biou fair touards

the afternoon. No actual reserve was placed on the potatoes by the owner. The usual time for passing entries at the Customs is within 2-1 hours after arrival. I know of only four entries being passed on the Saturday ; and the Customs officers stopped further discharge of dutiable cargo. James Humphrey produced written statement of survey, made by himself and \V r . J. Patterson, at the request of plaintiff; setting forth that the bags were all more or le=s wet, especially those lying on the roadway; that the re-bagging of the whole was necessary, to put them in a merchantable condition, the cost of which was estimated at £1 per ton ; and giving an opinion that the potatoes ought not to have been lauded during the rain then prevailing. By plaintiff: No dunnage was placed under the bags (about 150) lauded on the roadway. By defendant: It is not customary for goods to remain all night on the wharf. If the potatoes had been taken from the ship's tackles on Friday or Saturday, they would certainly have been in better condition than after lying on the wharf until the survey was made on Monday. Br plaintiff: The bags taken from off the deck were not in good condition. They were not all unsaleable, but most of them were. W. J. Patterson confirmed the statement of last witness.

Defendant produced his copy of the bill of lading, containing clause stating that the owners of the barque were not accountable for breakage, rupture of bags, or loss by natural decay of contents ; and also duplicate receipts from Melbourne agents, showing that some of the bags when shipped were more or less torn, and in bad order and condition ; also the receipts from carters at Westport, who had signed for 51S bags, on tickets containing the usual words, "in good order and condition." Defendant had to discbarge freight between the showers, and had never received orders to knock off from the plaintiff. By Court: The understanding with plaintiff was, that the bags were to remain on the wharf until Monday ; but instead of that, they were not removed until Thursday. It is not always usual to give notice b} r advertisement t > consignees to pass entrees. Captain Leech, harbor master, gave evidence as to having given verbal notice to Mr Parker to remove the potatoes either on Friday or Saturday morning, as it was not safe to allow thorn to remain on the wharf, as a fresh was rising in the river. Had given the wharfinger instructions to place a few bags on the roadway as the wharf was overweighted, being rotten and weak. It was usual to land perishable goods immediately a vessel came alongside. It was especially necessary to do so at this season with potatoes. From reference to his cliaiy he saw that fine weather prevailed on the Saturday, and he thought that had the potatoes been then taken away no damage would have occurred.

Edmund Lab.itt, delivery clerk at wharf, gave evidence as to delivery of goods to carters, at intervals between Monday morning and Thursday evcuing, taking receipts for delivery " in good order and condition." Every spare sail from the ship having been put over the bags in the meanwhile to keep them dry. T5 5 r Court : Asked plaintiff on Saturday what he meant to do with the potatoes, and he g.ivc witness instructions to look after them on his behalf. John Corr, agent for the Alma, deposed to asking plaintiff to get the potatoes away on the Friday. Plaintiff was then out of temper about overcharge made by the owners, and seemed to object to the bags being landed before he had a place to store them in. Witness considered that in any cause the potatoes, if not sold at once, would require rcbaggmg, as they were growing cut, and tubers, several inches long, were coming through the bags. Gave Parker written instructions to remove them on Saturday. The Collector of Customs gives permission to land perishable goods before parsing entries. Cspt. Leech, recalled : Twenty-four honrs fine weather prevailed from Friday at noon until Saturday noon. Then weather on Monday was squally; S.W. wind? prevailing. On that day about five tons potatoes were placed on the ro;idway by his instructions. Chas. Qua e, chief o3ieer of the

Alma, gave evidence as to discharging freight between the showers, knocking off work whenever the rain fell, and also as to careful covering of potatoes, and that the work of the ship was delayed for seven or eight hours in consequence of the wharf baing blocked with the bags. The Court reviewing the evidence, said the question was confined to the landing or otherwise of the freight in bad weather. It had been proved that rain had failen, but it was also proved that the weather was not bad on Friday and Saturday, during which time the plaintiff might have removed that portion of his property then already landed. There was nothing to justify the detention of the vessel to suit plaintiff's convenience, and the mere fact that a portion of the cargo, stipulated to be brought under hatches, had actually been brought as deck loading, could not be taken as proof of damage arising from goods being landed in tho wet. Moreover the bill of lading set forth that a portion was despatched as deck loading, from Melbourne, thus exonerating the Captain from any liability. Plaintiff

having arranged for an auction sale on the wharf on Saturday, clearly did so at his own risk, and had produced no evidence to prove damage up to that day. Upon the question whether the defendant had omitted any part of his duty, or shown any recklessness in its discharge, the Court held that some such neglect was shown on the Mou. day, in placing a small portion of tbe freight on the roadway, without dun. uage underneath, and, guided by the estimate made by the surveyors Messrs Humphrey aud Patterson• gave judgment for £1 per ton on six tons, surveyors fees £2 2s, aud cost of court £1 ss.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WEST18720820.2.7

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Westport Times, Volume VI, Issue 997, 20 August 1872, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,476

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT Westport Times, Volume VI, Issue 997, 20 August 1872, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT Westport Times, Volume VI, Issue 997, 20 August 1872, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert