PILLAGE

Grey River Argus, 8 April 1921, Page 6

PILLAGE

COURT CASE .Vl’ HOKITIK/V. | Al Ilio Hokitika S.M. Court yesterday, before .Mr, C. I>. Orr-Walkor, S.M., S. J. Preston (Air. .Park) proceeded against the Anchor S.S. Company (AJ r. Wells) for £3O Ids lid for ■ damages owing to shirr! delixery of ; goods shipped al Wellington (says the 1 ‘ ‘ Guardian. ’ ’) Samuel J. Preston deposed ‘he was suing for goods short in two cases shipped from Bing Harris and Co., at , Wellington. 'l’ho Iwo eases were delivered at the shop, and when the lid was taken off one it was semi al oner that the case had been pillaged, lieported the mailer io the clerk, of the local agent for the Anchor Coy. who inspected the ease, next morning and agreed that it had been pillaged. Sonne of the parcels in the case had been torn and articles had been extracted. The second case, when opened, was also found 1o be pillaged, and it was reported to Bing Harris and Co., and a. claim was made on. the Shipping Company. 'l’u Mr. Wells: 'l'he second case was not inspected by Mr. Sweney, Ihe. Company’s agent. Air. Jacobs was the consignee, and he signed the receipt for (he two cases as in good order. Apparently the cases were in good order. 'l'he undoing of the case was performed by an experienced pi I lager. The cases were old eases renailed, with an iron band round them. Albert Jacobs deposed he was a { carrier, and carried the two cases for IM r. Preston. These cases were apparently sound and he gave a (dear re- 1 | ceipt for them at the railway station. One was a tongued and grooved case. A little while after Mr Preston camo along and complained that the case had been pillaged. Ho could "not see anything wrong with the ease till. Mr , Preston showed how the nails had been taken out, and Ihe grooved board slid out. To Mr. Wells: A. (dear receipt had to be given the Railway Department before taking delivery. Florence 'Thompson deposed she was I accountant for Mr. Preston. She s:hv the two eases after being opened. Tn i one case the packages had been coni- | pletely taken out. She checked the • goods 'with, invoices, and found the ‘.articles mentioned in the claim. J S. J. Preston recalled, stated that | the first case was the T and (< ease. I (Evidence of the two packages and (the earlier to the ship was taken in Wellington). Mr. Wells for the defendant company submitted three points, claiming once there was delivery, the liability ceases and delivery had been made io Jacobs not Io Pi'eslon; further, that no negligence had been proved against the Company, and ihat there was no proof that the goods were pillaged while in the Company's possession; ( that there -was no proof that the j goods had not been pillaged while in 'other than the Company’s possession. Air. Park said if his Worship held the goods were delivered to the ship, then the Company was liable. His AVorship said he would reserve the non suit point raised. .Mr. Wells (dected md to call c\id ■ His Worship said this was 100 important :i. case Io decide oil' hand. He law on the subject and would reserve would look into lhe ovidem-e ;md the