THE CASE COWPER V. WILSON.

Waikato Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2180, 29 June 1886, Page 3

THE CASE COW PER Y. WILSON.

TO THK KDITOB.' ' > Sin, — Your report of the case tried in the R.M. Court last Friday between Mr Cowper and myself is so obviously one-sided, and therefore unfair, as to render the insertion °f » f'W lines from mo necessary. _ I would draw your attention to one important defect in the report, vis., a total omission of both addresses of my counsel. ' Judging from this it might be conjectured that no defence of » legal character w»<i attempted, whereas the fact is that there \va« A prolonged discussion on the point of law -in* volvcd, viz., whether or no a sale had been effected at all. That diictusiori might have had a different result but for a fact readily admitted by me, viz., that tho plaintiff had mentioned tho preparation of a formal agreement to me, but I had stated that I thought it unnecessary. Now, Sir, whilst this admission, as I knew it would, told against mo and probably entailed the cost?, I maintain that it tells— and forcibly too— against the plaintiff, for I argue thus : Either the plaintiff did know that such an agreement was necessary or ho did not know it. Now if he knew it he should have told me it was necessary, which on oath I denied that ho did. If he did not know it what right has he to undertake business which necessitates such knowledge ? Now for my statement of the facts as given in evidence. I admit employingthe plaintiff, admit that ho introduced a buyer, and that that buyer paid mo a deposit of £10. The plaintiff claimed his commission of £4 immediately. I demurred to its payment on the ground that the business was incomplete, but promised to pay if on enquiry I found such claim to bo m fair one. The plaintiff gave me one day to make such enquiries, and then wrote demanding immediate payment under tho alternative of enforcing a commission of £7 ss, or some 90 per cent, more ! I objected to this claim, and my objection was upheld by the verdict. Throe days after I was honoured with a lawyer's letter demanding this sum, , Declining correspondence on the matter, two more days passed and I was summonsed, sol, suppose eight days to be an unheard of time in give -credit in Cambridge ! I was advised to defend,: and the result was as given before, but I think the affair assumes a Somewhat different complexion from thus remembering to heed tho, old maxim of "hear the other side."— l am, yours truly, ' .T. G. Wilson. Cambridge, June 2Glh.