CORRESPONDENCE.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume XXXIII, Issue 8839, 16 May 1914, Page 5

CORRESPONDENCE.

AN;EXPLANATION

TO THE EDITOB,

c J&~ c defeuclant in the cage or Chapman and Davis against Reid, decided m the Magistrate's Court yesterday, I wish to supplement the report Of the proceedings which was published in last night's issue of the "Guardian " I have always striven and "been successful in paying 20s in the £, but 1 strongly object to paying other people's debts: The case not only involved a complicated dispute over sundry; extras: on the Ashburton County Hospital TOontract, but underlying this dispute there was an important principle of law. The Hospital Board employed 'on. the contract a clerk of, works, and this man ,took it upon himself to order various extras and additional 'w-ork's from the plaintiff, the painting sub-contrac-tor, without in any way consulting me, the chief contractor. Some of these extras and additional works were disallowed by the architect, . and the painter sought to make me liable for them, and naturally I objected. During the hearing of the case for the plaintiff it was admitted by ail the witnesses that I had not ordered these extras, but that they had hoc:: ordered l by the clerk of works.'NobwitCibinding ; the'urging of my lawyer that \lie contract for these extras was between the plaintiff and the Board (acting by their agent, the clerk of . worjr), the Magistrate decided. that I m.::>(•■ pay, for what all parties admitted I -.lid not 'Order. As unfortunately the amount involved is.so small that an appeal cannot be made to a higher court, I am compelled to take };his opportunity of letting the * public know the true facts of the case. The matter will not, however, be allowed to?'remain in its present position, as I intend to refer tha question to the Gbristchurch Builders' ' Association, of which I am a member, and that body will proceed to deal with the ca'ie on my behalf:

WILLIAM REID,