A MATTER OF CONTRACT.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXIX, Issue 66, 17 March 1908, Page 6

A MATTER OF CONTRACT.

Following en a ease heard last noeembor, i in which Messrs Hesketh and Aitl.cn, com- ' , mission agents, recovered £47 10/ from (!. j IS. Lintott and Co., commission agents, for failure to carry out a contract to deliver 20 tons of ehalT at £." 2/G a ton. (1. S. Lintott and Co. proceeded in the R.M. Court against .1. I). Fischer, hotelkeeper, to recover the amount of the damages paid by them to Hesketh and Aitken. together with i _:_! 10/ for amount of commission due on the [ sale, and i_lo 0/G costs, a total of £00 0/0. Mr I'rendergast appeared for plaintiffs, and Mr Kecd for defendants. I'laiulilT contended that a verbal contract, which was never afterwards denied by him. was made with defendant. lie had offered as reason for the non-delivery of the chaff, tliat it was not cut, and that the roads were too bad to cart it out, among others. The defence, on the other" hand, was a direct negative to the plaintiff's statement o{ the facts. Defendant said that as he only had l.'l tons of chaff he could never have eonrraeterl to supply 20 tons, nor did he know it was meant for Hesketh and Aitken. Iv giving his decision, Mr Dyer, S.M.. remarked on the conflict of testimony. It was singular, he said. that so remarkable a series of misunderstandings mistakes should have happened Defendant had. however, denied absolutely the existence of a contract. Tho onus of proof lay on the plaintiffs, and in view of all the circumstances, lie was of opinion that they had failed to substantiate the claim. Plaintiffs would be non-suited, with costs, __3. ___.