Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

DELIVERY OF GOODS

A CASE BEFORE COURT OF

APPEAL

SYSTEM OF DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW.

Further mention was maide to-day) before the Court of Appeal—the Court comprised the Acting-Chief Justice, Mt. Justice Sim, and their Honours Mr. Justice Hosk^ng, Mr. Justice Herdmam, and Sir John Salmond'—of the, appeal' made by the Unijt/ed' States and AustraiHa Steamship Company (Mr. A. ■W. Blair) against the decision of Mr. Justice Edwards, in favour of Charles Lyons, hardware , merchant, of Christchureh (Mr. 0. T. J. Al'pers), on a claim for the recovery of £452 Is 9d, in respect of shortages of pipes landed ex s.s. Westland at Wellington during the war period. The Chiistchurch consignment was but a part of the snap's cargo, and' during the discharge of goods from £h.« boat, 144 bundles and twelve lengths of pipes went astray. The case was complicated by the manner in which the cargo had been landedl, for though discharging operationß were commenced] in the ordinary way, the greater part of the cargo was later dumped. For- th® appellant Mr. Blair contended that, fromthe ship's point o )view, as set out on the bill of lading, delivery ceased at the ship's side, though it was admitted that there was a shortage of 78 bundfee, for which, the appellants were liable. The respondent maintained that there had never been proper delivery. This morning evidence was given by Captain A. "V. Hale Monro, chief wharfinger for the Wellington Harbonr Board, as to the arrangements made by the board for the engaging of labonr, the acceptance and storage of cargo, and the particular arrangements made between the ship's agents and the board for the dumping of the remainder of the cargo. He had been somewhat reluctant to agree to the arrangement, for he knew the complications which must follow, but agreed to the arrangement in view of the facts that the vessel was on a time charter and that the agents were anxious to get her aiway to minimise charter expenses, a matter of £300 or so per day. Nobody knew what the position was till sometime after the vessel sailed. The Harbour Board "had an approximate list of the pipes delivered, but had no particulars as to marks and details of quantities. \ To Mr. Alpers: As a rule a foreign ship lelt port with a detailed receipt as to goods landed for Smith, Brown, or Jones, but in the case of the Westland only a general receipt was given by the Harbour Board.

"Then there was no means by which Lyons could have proved that the Harbour Board got his pipes ?"—"That is BO."

Questioned as to the fact that a shortage of 78 bundles from the Westland had been apparently equalised by a surplus of 78 bundles gathered up on the wharf, the witness replied that the surplus was made up of oddments from several ships besides the Westland. The hold, after discharging operations, had been carried on for a time, resembled a barbed-wire entanglement on a big scale, and it appeared to him that the pipes had been loosely packed in New Yoik, and had been lifted out wherever a sling could be put round them, for'the average wharf worker did not mind whether the pipes bent or not. He believed that a quantity of pipes remained in the vessel when she sailed for Australia, wh,ich pipes were consigned to Australian merchantg. ' .

Mr. Blair said that he disagreed with the statement that (he pipes were bent and twisted, for they came out of the vessel in the ordinary manner.

Evidence was given by Alexander Paul, Customs inspector, who said that in accordance, with the practice frequently followed, the ship or the ship's agents were given a permit to land the cargo upon a guarantee that a satisfactory account for all goods landed would bi made to ' the Collector of Customs within 21 days. Dalgety and Co. put in a transhipment entry, but the entry necessary to clear the goods in respect of duty, etc., was made from Christchurch, three weeks after the vessel had discharged, her cargo. As a matter of fact it was quite a usual thing for those sureties to be made two or three weeks late, providing that a permit had been obtained from the Collector of Customs.

Mr. iH. A. Rothwell, manager for the overseas shipping department of Dalgety'st Ltd., said that he'had been told by a storeman that (he surplus pipes were all from the Westland. He admitted, however, that the storeman may have been mistaken.

The Court reserved its decision.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19210430.2.66

Bibliographic details

Evening Post, Volume CI, Issue 102, 30 April 1921, Page 6

Word Count
759

DELIVERY OF GOODS Evening Post, Volume CI, Issue 102, 30 April 1921, Page 6

DELIVERY OF GOODS Evening Post, Volume CI, Issue 102, 30 April 1921, Page 6

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert