COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION AGENCY.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 234, 26 June 1908, Page 8

COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION AGENCY.

"THE SPIDER AND THE FLY." JUDGMENT FOR THE PLAINTIFF. DR. M'ARTHUR SPEAKS HIS MIND. Dr. M'Arthur, S.M., yesterday delivered reserved judgment in tho case between llosina Wright v. Vanda White, a claim for £30, moneys alleged to . have been obtained by fraudulent misrepresentation. His Worship said that a groat deal of evidence had beon taken in tho caso, but that by ho means implied that a long judgment was a necessary sequence. It was evident to him that the defendant, who was a late arrival, in Now Zealand, and who had beon in business in Australia under another name, opened business of a similar character to tho one in question for the purpose of .-disposing of them to anyone who was soft enough or simple enough to take them. Ho would not burden the ]udgmont with any particulars of tho so-called branches in Dunedin and in Christchitrch. Neither would he enter intothe question as to whether the plaintiff signed a document which was not the, same as was road out to her. He .would assume

that she signe'd the document, as many foolishly did, without making herself acquainted with its contents. Tho question' that be had to dotermino was a short one.' Did tho' defendant induco tho plaintiff-,,t0 enter into partnership with him by-fraudulent misrepresentation? He had no hesitation in saying that the defendant did represent to tho plaintiff that he carried on a genuine and substantial • business in Wellington, with branches in Dunedin and ' Christchurch, whereas in fact, as lie well know,' his business was as mentioned in tho statement of claim insignificant and illusory. He also believed that tho defendant fraudulently represented that a sum of over £200 was received at tho offico in Wellington each week, either from or for the collection of debts, whereas in fact only a very small amount was received. A conclusive proof of this was that tho only, sum placed to his credit in tho bank was £28 out of tho £30 received from the plaintiff. Again, lie falsely represented that tho business carried on by him had branches in Dunedin and Christchurch, whereas, in fact it had no such branches, as ho well knew. Lastly, he falsely led tho plaintiff to believe that he had been in Wellington some threo or four months, whereas he had been only one month. The defendant's means of exploitation was by advertisement, and ho seemed to have had a special weakness for ladies to join his establishment. It 'was the old story of tho . spider and .the fly. Tho law was clear on the subject; where a person had boon induced by the false and fraudulent representation of another to enter into partnership with him, an action would clearly bo at the suit of tho first person against tho, second for tho recovery of damages which he had sustained by' reason of such fraud. There wero abundant authorities for that statement. , In justice to the plaintiff, ho could not overlook what ho might call tho Otaki affair. Ho firmly believed the plaintiff's story, and as firmly disbelieved that of tho defendant. One could hardly express one's detestation of a creature, who, aftor receiving money from a young girl by false representations, then dragged her name into Court for tho purpose of defaming her charactor. Those words. -were strong, but wero intended to be so. Tho defendant's motive was evident. Judgment would bo for tho amount claimed, . with costs amouiitinjj to' £5 Bs.

Mr. Von Haast, who appeared: on behalf of tho plaintiff, asked that an order for immediate execution do issue.

Mr.-Levvey, for defendant, considered that tho application was not a fair one under the circumstances. As a matter of fact, he had been instructed to ask for leave to appeal. His Worship: You can appeal! Mr. Levvey: I am not oxpressing, any opinion on the case. ■

Mr. Voli.Haast pointed out that defendant had admitted that ho owed £15 to" the plaintiff, and had made no provision for paying her, at all. Unless plaintiff got an order for immediate execution, she might not get anvthinrc if defendant left the city. IHs Worship: I think this is a proner case in which an order'should be granted.