TONGAN NEWS.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXV, Issue 197, 18 August 1904, Page 2

TONGAN NEWS.

On 25th July the schooner Ysabel arrived from Auckland with general cargo. On the same day the French man-of-war Zelee arrived from New Caledoihla. After taking lv GO tons of coal supplied by Messrs Tines, Utting, and Perston, Limited, she sailed for Tahiti on the 25th July. The weather is very cold for this time of year, and trade is not improving, as was expected it would. The general health Is good, and all is going on well, but business is very dormant. H.M.s. Torch is expected to arrive tomorrow, and possibly with Admiral Fanshawe on board for a visit to Tonga. BUUNS, PHILP AND COMPANY V. GEORGE SCOTT. The well-known Australian and South S«a Islnuds commercial firm of Burns, Philp and Company were the plaintiffs In a somewhat curious and complicated suit which came before the British Consular Court here during the latter days of last week, the Bench on this occasion being reinforced by the presence of two Independent gentlemen assessors. The case lasted for three days, and was productive of much confused and contradictory evidence, but its main facts stood forth clear and deducible enough when the verbiage was etfted. Mr George Scott, solicitor, of Nukualofa, was defendant In the action. Plaintiffs claimed that from August, ISKTJ, to November, laos, the defendant was a partner with Mr A. D. Cameron, also of Nukualofa, in the business of the Royal Hotel Id this towu. Between the dates mentioned plaintiffs supplied the alleged partners with goods and cash In connection with the business in question, and ou the 21st November, 1903, the balance due upon thia account amounted to £1000. Accounts had been duly rendered to the partners, iuid the balance of £1060 had been stated and agreed upon between the parties. WLr Cameron, who was now carrying on the hotel business on his sole account, had agrc-od to pay his one-half share ot the indebtedness abovenuuitloned by quarterly instalments, and had given security to plaintilld for the due execution of his agreement. Mr Scott, however, re pudiated the stated connection with Mr Cameron, and denied all liability as regards the hotel accouuts. Plaintiffs then initiated the action under notice. The. assessors round that the contention that the lloyal Hotel was the speculation of the plaintiff firm was confuted by the evidence of all the parties to the suit, that Messrs Cameron and Soon were partners in the hotel business during the period covered by the plaintiffs' claim, that Mj as mauagiug partner, had accepted on behalf ol himself and hid partner, Mr Scott, the prices charged tue hold by the plaintiff company, that uo such composition of the hotel debt as was alleged by the defence was proved to have been effected. The Magistrate (Mr Hunter), In giving his decision, stated that the facts laid before the Court compehed him to agree entirely with the rulings of the assessors. Judgment was accordingly entered for the plaintiffs, as against Mr Scott, lor the sum ol £530 tu«l costs of the case. A SHIPPING DISPUTE. DEJUPHIC V. GANYMEDE. At the Magistrate's Court a small disputed claim of £4 17/3 for damage done by the barque Ganymede to the stenmer Delphic was dealt with. The claim stated that the damage was caused through the negligent navigation of the Ganymede. Mr Blair appeared for tue plaintiffs (tlie Shaw, Savill and Albion Co.), and Mr Mays for the defendant (Mr W. G. Watefson, Invercareiii). Captain John Breen, master of the Delphic, said that on July 29th the steamer was moored at the outer tee of the Queen street Wharf, and the barque Ganymede passed In the direction of Hobson street Whart, being towed by close to the Delphic at a good rate. She struck the Delphic with her jib-boom, breaking and twisting the stern rail. J. J. Symons, chief officer of the Delphic, stated that he went round and saw the captain of the Ganymede after the accident. The latter admitted the damage, and said he would make the tugboat people pay for it. Witness invited the captain round to see the damage, and he said there wns uo need for that, and agreed that the repairs should be carried out by the Delphic and the bill sent to the agents. Captain White, of the firm of Nearing and Co., saw the collision. The ebb tide had struck the vessel on the starboard bow aud swept her on to the Delphic. The Ganymede's boom did the damage, sweeping over the rail and twisting it If the vessel had been further out—and there was plenty of room—the collision would never have occurred. To Mr Mays, witness said that in his experience the custom in this port was that the tow controlled the tug The Ganymede was being backed Into the second jetty wheu the accident happened Mr Mays applied for an adjournment Sine die, since the Ganymede was somewhere between here and Melbourne, and her arrival was uncertain. The magistrate (Mr Kettle) asked what the claim was specificaly based on Mr Blair replied that it was for specific negligence. The Delphic, being moored to the wharf, could do nothing, and it was the business of the other vessel to keep out of her way. The collision could have been avoided by the Ganymede's being kept out in the stream. c The adjournment was granted.