THE HESLERTON ESTATE.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 11753, 30 November 1903, Page 8

THE HESLERTON ESTATE.

CONTINUATION OF THE CASE

.The Supreme Court action between Garrick and Copland for specific performance and damages in respect of the sale of the Haslerton Estate, waa continued on Saturday. Mr Skerrett, with him Mr Fisher, appeared for tbe plaintiff, and Mr Harper, with him Mr Maude, for the defendant. Mr Russell watched the case on behalf of Matson and Co.

Mr Skerrett intimated that he would call evidence in rebuttal of that given in support of defendant's affirmative defence. Leicester Matson, senior partner in Matson and Co., stock and station agents, Christchurch, stated there were three brothers in the firm, David, Harry, and himself. The present business ,had been established for twelve years, and prior to that ifc was carried on by his father. Part of the business was the ealo of city and station property. In June, Heslerton was given to the firm for sale. They had been instructed that until they had sold lots 1 and 2 they could not accept offers for tlie remaining lots. He, himself, had not inspected 'Heslerton, and was not consulted as to the prioes placed on the different blocks. The property was accordingly advertised for sale. In" the advertisement a special referenlb was made to lot 6, the homestead block, for Copland had given instructions that the homestead block was not to be dealt with until the remainder of the property had been sold. In the plan of Healerton there were prices placed on all the lots except the homestead blocks. Mr Copland distinctly said that the sale would have to be effected within three weeks, and he was doubtful whether that was not running the time too long, because the ewee would be lambing by tihat time. This was in his written instructions. Plans of the estate, showing subdivisions, were prepared and circulated, and the whole coßt of advertking and theplans was paid by the firm. In July, Mr Copland sent some hoggets and fat ewes to the firm for sale. Mr Copland said the sale was to show the public tho excellent .qualities of the sheep raised on Heslerton. After the advertisements appeared, about half the EHesmere district called to enquire about the property, and most people regarded the prices asked as a huge joke. On July 6th, Mr Jonathan Sowden came into the office and saw H. Mateon. Mr Copland was in his (witness's) room at the time. Speaking through a slide into hk room, H. Matson informed Mr Copthat he had got Jonathan Sowden in hk reom, and he had made the offers asked for for lota 4 and 5. Copland replied thai he would nob sell until he had sold lots 1 and 2. Harry went back to Sowden, and on returning told Copland that Sowden would increase hk offer by 2* 6d for lot 4, making it £3 ISs for 4 and 5, if he could get the Hots. Copland again replied that he would not sell until he had disponed of lots 1 and 2. Harry Matson had a further conversation with Sowden, and then told Copland that if he would sell at once, Sowden would give £3 ISs for 4 and 6, and probably would take Jot 3 at reserve price, £2 6s. • Copland then replied that he would bo selling all the best part of the land, and until I and 2 were sold he would -not entertain any offer. He had recommended Copland to accept Sowden's offer just to give the thing a «taxt. Copland, however, agreed to give Sowden the first refusal of 4 and 5. The firm had placed higher reserves, on the lots than that fixed by Copland, bub Copland had been consulted as to this policy, and had replied that "he did not care whafe the firm asked, so long aa his prices were obtained. Copland asked to have sent to him a list of the prices asked, and a marked plan was accordingly sent. While in tbe hands of the bank Heslerton had been .in the market for about 16 or 17 years, and had been in the hands of other station agents before it- come to Matson and Co. It was continuously in the market up to the purchase by Mr Copland. On July 6th, David Mateon went to Dunsandet for the purpose of showing intending purchasers over the property. On the following morning Henderson made him an offer of £3000 for lot 2. He had no discretion to accept that offer. He instructed David to interview Sowden concerning lob 3, for vhich the firm had no written offer. On July 7th, he considered the propriety of accepting the offers for lots 2, 3, 4, and 5, for the total of these offers was more than; Mr Copland's reserve. He obtained legal advice as.to his Ewer to accept the offers on Copland's half, and found himself unable to accept them. On the morning of tbe 7th he met Mr Garriok. He had mentioned Heslerton to Garrick before, with the object of inducing him to purchase the property., At the time Garrick did not entertain any of tlie proposals. On the 7th, Garrick enquired after Heslerton. He waa asked to make an offer for. lots 1,2, and 6, was told thai if he made such an. offer the whole property would be sold. He was informed also of Sowden's offers. He (witness) then asked Garrick-why he did nob have a go for the whole lot, pointing out that lie could sell 3, 4, and 5 to Sowden, and could dispose of tbe remainder at a reasonable price. Garrick replied that he would think it over. Previously Garrick had asked the price for tho whole, and he stated that it would be £25,350, which was calculated according to Copland's prices. He had given Garripk no information oa to Henderson's offer} and that offer was not mentioned. Later on he saw Mr Balfour in town, and informed him of Sowden's and Henderson's offers, and discussed the expediency of accepting the offers, and reducing.the prices on the remaining unsold lots. While the discussion waa going on, Mr Goodman put his head inside tho door. He called Goodman in, and asked hia opinion upon the question of accepting the offers and reducing the values of the remaining lots. Goodman replied that that could sot be done in the face of Copland's instructions. Goodman recommended that tbe whole thing should be placed before Copland. He mentioned that he waa negotiating with Garrick for the sale of the property, and added that in all probability Garrick would be a buyer for the whole. Goodman stated that an agreement would be wanted, and he replied that he thought that was a bib premature, but stated that lie was to see Garrick later «m. , Goodman, who appeared keen for a job, then asked that he would ring him up if he was wanted. A telegram was then sent tc Copland. Afterwards Garrick came in, and stated that he was prepared to negotiate for the whole. | He informed Garrick that Copland had I been telegraphed for, and stated that GarI rick had better come down to bis house that night. Garrick replied that he was not in a position at the time to see the i thing through, but he replied, "Don't let j that worry you for a moment; 111 make that all right." Mr Garrick gave particulars as to how his mone- was tied up at the time, and mentioned one or two properties. Garrick'* financial position was a good one. The reasons he got, Copland up that night were that tbe firm had bad a good many enquiries and very few offers, and lie felt that the offers made should be clinched, because they were good offers.. The firm were desirous of earning their comnlission. Henderson's offer waa up the

next day. There waa a feeling in hia mind that Copland might withdraw the sale of, the property altogether. That evening Goodman telephoned up, and asked whether he had seen Garrick. He replied that ho had, and that Garrick waa prepared to negotiate for the property, but that the firm were going to do their be_t to make Copland accept the offers that were in. Goodman replied that, then an agreement wonld be required, and caked whether he would some up. adding there would be no harm be wa* not required. On the evening*of the 7th. before Mr Garrick was called into the room, he led up to the reason why Copland had been brought down, and pointed out to Copland that- the firm felt *o strongly tlie advisability of accepting the offers that tl icy had decided to bring him down that night. Copland replied that _, 4, and 5 were not to be sold until after 1 and 2 had been disposed of. He asked Copland if he would accept the offers for 3, 4 and 5 at the increased prices, and make a reduction on 1 and 2. Copland would nob agree to this. He also Hold Copland that if the prices of 1 and.2 were reduced they could be sold, and the homestead could be disposed of without difficulty. He also mentioned to Copland that Garrick was negotiating for the whole property. Garrick's name was not introduced until after Copland had definitely decided not to sell 3, h, and 5, or to reduce the reserves on 1 and 2. The conversation had lasted for more, than an hour btfore Garrick's name was mentioned. It was not true that Copland said he had made up bis mind or that he might accept Sowden's offer for 3, 4, and 5. No refereuco was made to Balfour's opinion that it was advisable not. to sell 3, 4, and 5, before disposing of 1 and 2. Balfour at the meeting expressed the opinion that Copland should close with Sowden's offer, as it was such a good one. After lie had mentioned Garrick's inquiries, Copland stated that Sowden's offer worked out roughly at £16,000, and the balance of the estate was worth 30s an acre. Copland asked him to work out the acreage of lots 1, 2, and 6 at 30s. He worked the figures out on tlie plan, and made a total of £25,750. Copland said that he would sell the whole for £25,500. He then told Copland that Garrick was m the front room, and the best thing would be to bring him in and let him negotiate. He had given no advice or opinion as to the price Copland should ask for the property. Garrick, when brought in, asked Copland what he would take for the place, and • Copland replied that be would take £26,000. Garrick said that was different from what Matson and Co. had told him. A conversation followed, and ultimately Garrick agreed to givo the price, on condition that Copland would extend his mortgage arrangements to any subpurchasers that Garrick mighb get. Copland stipulated that Garrick was to cell 3, 4, and 5 to Sowden. Copland at first objected to the mortgage arrangement, but be consented on condition that Garrick would endorse the mortgagee from the sub-pur-chase-!. He did not interfere one iota in the negotiations between Copland and Garrick, except as regards the mortgage difficulty. The agreement was prepared by Mr Goodman, read over, and agreed to., Some objection was made by Copland tnat tne bank might not agree to transfer direct to the sub-purchasers, and tlie agreement was accordingly made subject to the bank's consent. He saw Garrick again the next morning, who inquired concerning Matson's commission on the sale to Sowden, and it was agreed that the firm should have 10 per cent, on any profit. Garrick also said that tne firm could sell lot 2 if they thought it advisable. On July 9th Garrick signed the produced agreement with Matson and Co. Ho' saw Copland at the Addington yards on July Btb. Copland* said he had been down to the bank, and had fixed up everything satisfactorily. Copland also arranged that the clearing sale ahould be fixed for tlie 16th. He had had no secret agreement whatever with Mr Garrick with reference to the purchase of Heslerton. Tbe purchase was entirely by Mr Garrick for himself. Mr Garrick was a brotlier-in-law of his, but had not been in tlie employment of the firm since 1896. Occasionally he came to Addington for his own experience, and was taken on as a casual hand. Prior to season ending November, 1902, lie had had certain joint "transaction, with Mr. Garrick in wool and frozen meat. Mr Garrick had placed sums on deposit with the firm at 4 per cent. Since December, 1901, the firm had had no joint transactions with Garrick in wool or meat. Any transactiona were Garrick's own. Mr Garrick; purchased Heslerton through tbe firm, and he had also purchased Mr Thomas's pro- j perty through Matson and Co. With one small exception there had been no joint transaction in land between the firm and Garrick. In June lie saw Nixon about Heslerton, but Nixon, then refused to have anything to do with it. On July 6th, Copland was in his room, and he told 'himthat Nixon waa one of those who had disparaged the property. Prior to July 7th, Mr Nixon had not enquired after the prices for the homestead block and lot 1. The estate had been offered to others besides Garrick. .

To Mr Harper: He saw Garrick several times about the Heslerton property, but he could not remember the first time. The property was put irt Matson's hands for sale on June 20th,' and he spoke to Garrick several times after the 20th. He met Mr Garrick nearly every day. Before July 7th he had suggested that Garrick should become the purchaser of the property as a whole, but _o price was named. That suggestion was made before any offers had been received. He did not think he had bad an interview with Garrick on July 6th. He had not told. Garrick of Sowden's offer before July" 7th. On July 7th he spoke to Garrick about Heslerton and mentioned Sowden's offer. He did not say anything of Henderson's offer. He advised Garrick to buy the place as a. whole, he thought,? for £25,350. At that time he knew of Henderson's offer of £3000, which would make the offers total £19,445. He knew at that time the reserves Copland had put on the remaining lote*l and 6. On lot 1 the reserve was 27s per acre, and on lot 6 £2 17s. There were 2016 acres in lot 1, and 2261 in lot 6. He did not reckon out tlie total after including the offers for 2, 3, 4, end 5, and Copland's reserves for 1 and 6. He did nob know that the total would be £28,619. He advised Garrick to offer £25,350 for the property as a who)e. When he approached Garrick, his idea was that Garrick would settle on the homestead block. Tbe question cf financing Garrick .was nob spoken of at the interview on July 7th. He saw Balfour the same afternoon, and told him that he was negotiating with Garrick for thebaic of the property as a whole. Mr Goodman came in unexpectedly while the conversation with Balfour was going'on. He asked Mr Goodman's opinion concerning the sale to Sowden, for Mr Balfour's benefit. Goodman was in the room when'he sent the l telegram to Copland to come to town. As a rule the firm prepared their ,own sale and purchase agreements. At the time he saw Goodman in the afternoon lie did not contemplate that an agreement would be wanted in the evening. It was Goodman who said that an agreement would be wanted, if there was a sale of the property as a whole to Garrick, and Goodman was very keen on coming up that evening, and he put' him off by saying he would ring him up later on, Goodman rang witness up. Matson and Co. had not yet paid Goodman for the agreement, but he expected the firm would be charged for it. Mr Goodman waa not led to believe that he would get any other business out of tbe agreement. He did not think he told Goodman to hold himself in readiness in case an agreement were wanted. He did not tell Mr Garrick' that he was going to have Goodman up that evening, and had received no instructions on the point from Garrick. He saw Garrick at 4 o'clock, after he had had the interview with. Balfour. At the interview in the evening he did not tell Copland that he had had an offer for lot 2 from Henderson for £3000, and be did nob mention Nixon's name to Copland. At the interview in the evening he- knew that be had bad offers amounting to over £19,000. He was then acting as agent for Copland, and

he did nod then reckon that even with Mr Cop~nd'» reserve* the property would come out- at £28,000. Garrick gave a cheque for £2600 deposit- The cheque was handed to him by Mr Copland. Before the cheque was given he' had arranged to finance Garrick. He had not been engaged with Garrick in any join* wool or fitwen meat transactions after season 1901. He was interested in the purehß.se during 1902 of a Peninsula property by Garrick for £1040. The property was resold for £1200, and he divided the profits with "Garrick. At that time he was not- acting as agent for the sale, but he received commission according to the agreement made with the vendor, who was very anxious to sell. On that day tlie vendor'saw'witness, who declined to do'business with her until sbo had communicated with her solicitor, and if after that interview sJie was still bent on business he could sell the property, iie eventually sold to Garrick, who held the property some months, and eventually sold by giving extended terms. Witness's share of tlie profit on tlie re-fole was £48. To Mr Skerrett—Prior to July 7th tbe conversations with Garrick with reference to Heilerton were quite casual. When be saw Copland on July 6th he had not got Henderson's offer. On the following day lie got Henderson's offer for lot 2, and it was then lie sent for Balfour, because he thought that Balfour would have influence with Copland in persuading him to accept Sowden's offer for lots 3, 4, and 5. There was an offer of £19,000 in hand, and the reserves on the remaining lots came to £9164. Mr Garrick was buying the- property, which was valued at that sum, but for which witness had no offer for £7000. Mr Garrick still retained a mortgage of £800 on the Peninsula property. Tlie owner of the property told him he could buy it if lie chose to give £12 an acre for it. Mr Garrick was only in the office for twelve months, to gain Home office experience, as lie had been brought up as a farmer. To his Honour: Garrick bought without knowing of Henderson's offer. James Balfour, station manager, stated that he had been manager of Heslerton for nearly ' seven years, being employed by the Bank of New South Wales. The property had been put up for sale at Leeston in 1893, and it was in the market while be was manager. Copland had a practical knowledge of the property at the time he purchased from the Bank. He had told Copland that he thought the property Mould cut up well. He advised the Bank as to the method of subdivision. The reserve prices were given by Copland to David He had discussed with Matsons the ■ advisability of accepting Sowden's offer. He understood that Mr Garrick was after the property as a whole. He, for one, had made the suggestion that Copland should be sent for. At the interview in the evening, Copland had agreed to consider an offer of £25,500 for the whole. When Garrick came into the room he asked Copland what his price was, and Copland replied £26,000. Copland had altered his mind while Mr Mateon had gone to fetch Garrick. Garrick ultomately agreed to give the £26,000, and it was arranged that three-fourths of tlie sub-purchaser's money should remain on mortgage. The discussion as to price took place between Mr Garrick and Mr Copland, and Mr L. Matson took no port. To Mr Harper: When Copland enquired about Henderson, he did not hear David Mateon say that Henderson waa only fooling. To Mr Skerrett: The quality of the land comprised in lota 1 and 2 was rather poor, and only fib for sheep. The quality of the Heslerton land varied according to tlie seasons.

At this stage tho Court adjourned until ten o'clock this morning.