RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XXIII, Issue 1408, 3 June 1865, Page 5

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

KAIAPOI. —Tuesday, May 30. Rickman, Bros. v. Stone. — £33, amount of damages claimed for loss sustained by plaintiffs, in c6nsequence of a quantity of dirty, sprouted, and bad grain having been wilfully placed in 132 sacks of barley purchased from the defendant. The defendant had consented to judgment by default; but Mr. Rickman said he had brought the case into court so that he might make the following statement, and thereby expose the present very frequent practice amongst farmers of selling grain by a good sample, and delivering a very inferior quality. Mr. Rickman said: On the 13th March last I purchased 1,000 bushels of barley from defendant Stone. 132 sacks were delivered to me in April last, containing 471 bushels by weight. I examined the barley by an instrument used for obtaining samples from any part of a sack. I tried a good way towards the bottom of the sacks, and found it according to sample. The barley was then stored until the early part of May, when the maltster fetched a quantity of it for use in the brewery. He shot it into the steep-bin, which was filled with water. He had emptied one or two bags into the bin, when he called me to look at it. I did so, and found a quantity of dirt, &c., floating on the surface of the water. We tried two or three more bags, examining them carefully as we emptied them into the bin. The result was, that we found at the bottom of the sacks a quantity of bad barley, &c., mixed with dirt. I then wrote to the defendant, who paid no attention to my letter. I waited some time, and eventually, I requested Messrs. Birch, Revell, and W. Norman to inspect the grain. They did so, and the following is their report: — Kaiapoi, May 16,1865. We, the undersigned, have this day examined certain sacks of barley in the loft above Messrs. Rickman, Brothers' warehouse at Kaiapoi. We had the corn shot out of several sacks into a bin; other sacks were ripped open along the side and across the bottom. In every sack we found the barley good for about three-fourths or seven-eighths down the sack, but one bushel to a half-bushel of corn at the bottom of each sack, musty, damp, dirty, and grown. This was less apparent in one single sack than the others; but from the regularity with which the bad barley was deposited in each sack, we are unanimously of opinion that it was placed there purposely,

and with intent to defraud. We declare that this barley is not in a mercantile condition. ( Josiah Birch, Signed I Edward Reveal, [ Wim-iam Norman. I then wrote to defendant again, enclosing the above report, and requested 'him to pay the amount of damages sustained, or make some arrangement respecting tiie barley. The defendant took no notice of my letter for some time -, when he came down, and said I had overcharged the damage, and that he was absent when the sacks were filled. We came to no arrangement ; therefore I immediately issued a summons against him. In bringing this case into Court, I merely wish to expose this practice, which is, I am sorry to say, becoming far too prevalent amongst farmers. The Bench expressed their opinion that such practices as the above were fraudulent, and would eventually get those who indulged in them into serious difficulties.