DISAPPOINTED BUYER.

Auckland Star, Volume LXII, Issue 94, 22 April 1931, Page 8

DISAPPOINTED BUYER.

I YOUNG MAN FROM ZURICH. j PURCHASE OF WAIKATO FARM CLAIM FOR £2500 DAMAGES. (By Telegraph.—Own Correspondent.) HAMILTON, this day. An action seeking £2500 damage? for alleged misrepresentation in the sale of a farm of 220 acres at Monavale, near Cambridge, is being heard in the Supreme , Court at Hamilton to-day. Plaintiff is a young Swiss named Arthur Otto Frederick Schultz, formerly of Zurich, ; where his parents reside, and defendants • John Odlin and Company, land agents, Wellington. For plaintiff Mr. F. Swarbrick (Hamilton) and with him Mr. F. Kingsford (Cambridge) appear. Defendants are represented by Mr. O'Leary (Wellington). His Honor Mr. Justice Smith is on the Bench. The statement of claim sets out that in the month of September, 1925, the defendant company, by its agent, Arnold Biland, at Zurich, Switzerland, repre- ' sented to plaintiff that 30 or 40 acres of the property in question couhl be brought into permanent pasture e cry two to three years by maintaining the existing drains and opening up subsidiary ones. He also stated that plaintiff, by his labours, would be able to produce sufficient returns from the farm to maintain plaintiff and pay off the cost of the property in ten. years. As a further inducement to plaintiff to purchase the farm it was alleged that defendant company, by its agent, C. C. Odlin, of Monavale, on or about March 31, 1930, represented to plaintiff that the depth of peat on the property was not more than one foot., Plaintiff was thereby induced to purchase, relying on the truth of defendants' statements, and he paid defendants £1200 cash and executed in their favour a mortgage over the property securing £2000 payable in October, 1942, by quarter y instalments of £50 at the rate of 6 per cent. Plaintiff now alleged that the statements made by defendants' agents were false and were made well knowing them to be untrue and with a reckless disregard*of their veracity. Return of Money Claimed. Plaintiff therefore claimed the return of the £1700 deposit, £50 14/ costs of the .transfer, £28 17/11 for permanent improvements, £24 the cost of shares in the Cambridge Co-operative Dairy Company, £23 18/9 three months' interest paid in terms of the mortgage. He also asked for the cancellation of the mortgage; that defendants be ordered to accept a re-transfer of the property, and asked for £500 general damages. An alternative claim for £2500 damages was made. The defence set up was that plaintiff came to New Zealand in contemplation of the possibility of purchasing some part of the said farm; that, after having resided on an adjoining part of-the farm (lot 2) for one month he approached defendants with the object of buying lot 3. Defendants did not know what, if any, representations were made to plaintiff by Arnold Biland in Zurich. If the representations as alleged were made they were as expressions of opinion, and were honestly believed by defendants to be true. A denial was also entered ot the representation allegedly made by ' C. C. Odlin. A Visit to Switzerland. j In opening the case for the plaintiff, j Mr. Swarbrick said the fraud alleged consisted, first of all, of representations I made by the agent of defendants in \ Switzerland, and also by the managing 1 director of the company actually on the I property. The fraud was described by j counsel as a very gross one. The farm ' was sitnatpd in Tiin.t.iia. WcvAr\n swnmn (

j. was situaLeu. in xuaiua ivioana swamp, 3 meaning "sea of big black rushes," 20,000 acres in extent, between Cambridge and t Te Awamutu. It still remained the "sea of big black rushes," and the reason it could not be brought into cultivation was on account of the very great depth 7 of peat. It was true that on the edges . where the peat was shallow certain improvements had been made. In order i to bring these swamps under cultivation 3 it was necessary to drain them right down to their very bottom. Peat varied t from 18ft to 40ft deep. From the year 1914, said counsel, . Odlins had held this property, and had I repeatedly tried to improve and sell it. , C. C. Odlin, about the year 1925, was a prominent Rotarian, and attended a i Rotary conference at Zurich, Switzer- ? land. While there he conceived the idea ; of trying to induce Swiss settlers to come to New Zealand and purchase parts ! of this swamp. He appointed another ' prominent Swiss Rotarian named Biliand as his agent for the property. The latter caused what was known as an "expose" ; to be published in Switzerland setting out in glowing terms the prospects offered to young Swiss by settling in New Zealand and purchasing these particular farms. One of the statements in the "expose" was to the effect that purchasers would be able in ten years to pay for the cost of farms out of their earnings therefrom. Photographs I of the district were also published. Treated with Courtesy. Young Schultz, plaintiff, who was then a youth of 20 years, counsel continued, was induced by Biliand to make a deposit of £200 on one of these farms. He then came out to New Zealand, landing at Wellington in 1929. He was met by a representative of the firm of Odlin and Company and was taken to Odlin's house and treated with the greatest courtesy. He was later taken to Monovale by Odlin in company with another young Swiss named Graedel, who had just arrived from Switzerland. Odlin showed them the fringe of the property, and, pointing to the drain, said, "There is good black soil beneath the peat, and when you get rid of the peat you will have a lovely farm." What was shown the youths as peat was merely burnt ash on the surface. As the result of the representations made this youth of 20 was induced to buy 20 acres of the improved fringe and a further 200 acres stretching for a mile into this deep peat swamp. Instead of being able to bring in 40 acres a year as represented, Mr. Swarbrick said he would show that it was impossible to bring in the land at all except by a large comprehensive scheme of drainage embracing the whole of the swamp. In one of his letters Odlin had promised to be a second father to the boy. Plaintiff Cross-examined. Giving evidence in broken English, the plaintiff traversed the ground outlined by counsel. He said Graedel bought the adjoining farm, and another Swiss settler named Stucki also bought an adjacent piecd of swamp. Plaintiff and Graedel were now working their farms I together, and milking 25 cows between i them. There were about 30 acres ef l

In answer to Mr. O'Leary, plaintiff said he believed what Biland. told him about the land, and what he read in the "expose," because Biland was a prominent Rotarian and witness believed him to be an honest man. He thought Biland believed what he said. Plaintiff [ said he spent two years at an agricultural college before coming to New Zealand. He knew that Arnold Biland, the agent's son, was in New Zealand at that time, and had recommended these farms. Plaintiff said he consulted his solicitors over the present claim without any reference.or complaint to Odlin. (Proceeding.)