SUPREME COURT.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXVI, Issue 7926, 31 July 1886, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

CIVIL SITTINGS. Ebiday, July 30. (Before his Honor Mr Justice Johnston and a Jury of twelve.) . HOBKBBY T. KINO. The "trial of this caße was resumed at 10.30 a.m. Mr Joynt stated that he had amended his «laim by allowing -850 off the price of the "combine" and the. freight and charges from London. Mr Austin opened for the defence, and -called George King, the defendant : In February, 1884, had interviews with Mr J. W. Hornsby. The result was that witness took up the agency for Hornsby's ma■ohinery. Mr Southwell, general manager for Hornsby and Son, had previously called, but witness had not seen him. Mr Southwell left a letter with Mr Hornsby, giving the basis on which business was to be ■done with witness. Hornsby submitted this letter to witness. (Letters had been pro--duced and other letters from Hornsby to witness.) Witness wrote to Mr Southwell, •in Melbourne, and to Hornsby and Son. In the last ordered a combine to be in Christchurch for the November Bhow. Received acknowledgment, and confirmation of his agency for North Canterbury. On Oct. 22 a letter with invoice and bill of lading of the combine, traction engine, &c. The machines arrived after the show was held. PaidJ64B7s lid freight on the traction -engine. Paid £6 6d 8d for railway carriage. Paid £5 8s 6d for fitting up the traction -engine. On Feb. 13, 1885, witness wrote to plaintiffs advising them that the engine had arrived too late for the show. Had, in consequence, to advertise. The show -would have been the best advertisement. 'Witness paid JE9 6s for advertising the traction engine and the agency. In 1885 »nd 1886 paid £7 6s 4d for similar advertisements. On June 4 received acknowledgment, and an offer to consign 12 binders. Sent by cablegram an order for twelve. The witness detailed minutely his transactions with the plaintiffs. Had several conversations with Mr Quinn about the sale of the traction and taking in part payment the portable engine. Mr Quinn said he ! would take the traction at JBSOO if witness IWpuld take the portable at .£2OO, explain- %> that the latter was as good as new. said he would take the latter at a valuation. Eventually Mr Quinn consented to this. The binders arrived toy the Hudson, which was stranded -on the Timaru coast. The advertisements were thrown away, as they arrived too late for the show. Beceived advice of triumphs of the machines, and advertised and had circulars printed aa requested by plaintiffs. The charges for this were included in the accounts. Witness had ttaken a space on the show ground for exhibiting the binder and traction engine, which did not arrive in time. Paid 30d ■for space. The witness produced vouchers for these and other items. With regard to the exchange of the portable engine, Mr ilorfcea, the representative of the plaintiffs, Approved of it, and instructed witness to advertise the engine for sale, and to take .£IOO for it. This was after Mr Morton had seen the contract with Mr Quinn. had not yet disposed of the portable engine. Had in one instance refused J&100 for it. Had now a letter agreeing to take it on an arrangement for as good aa _£lso cash. Paid £lO4 general average on the Hudson, and forwarded the receipt to -the plaintiffs for them to collect the in•.surance. Cross-examined : Got on very amicably with Mr Morten. The chief dispute was in -connection with the advertising charges. The £lO4 and the portable engine matters had been arranged. The letter of Feb. 22, 1884, contains nothing as to the importance of the traction eDgine arriving in time ior the show, but it should be taken in ■conjunction with the order for the combines. Notwithstanding the plaintiffs' intimation that witness was not to take the portable engine he did so in their interest. They received witness' order for tsheaf-binders on July 6, by cable, and shipped them on July 22 by the Hudson. That was not a great delay, but they were -indiscreet in shipping by a sailing vessel instead of by a steamer. The examination and cross-examination were extremely protracted. Maurice Samuel Eidley: Was in Mr Xing's employ last March. Eemembered the trial at Wood's mill, Eiccarton, of one -of Hornsby's traction engines. Mr Morten was present, and was well satisfied. Cross-examined: I went back to Chriit--cburch. I don't know what became of the others. Mr Quinn and others were there. Ebenezer M'Rae, bookkeeper to the -defendant: The gross freight and charges on the combine, &c, were £133 Gs. Witness made a calculation of the amount ■chargeable to the traction engine—£4B 7s lid. It was simply a question of measurement. Occupied two hours to work it out. j Arrived at the item £6 6s 8d for railage -from Lyttelton, in the same way. The advertising accounts produced he had divided :as well a 3 he could so as to extract the -amount chargeable to the traction engine. Made it £9 6a. Another advertising account witness made out, but Mr King told liim to reduce it by striking out one or two items. Did so, and reduced it to £7 15s 4d. Witness made out -the account attached to the statement of defence. The witness explained -a. number of items in the statement. Was j present during an interview between Mr J Morten and Mr King. Was called into the_ room several times. The first time was* with reference to a charge of £1 183 6d on t account of a show reaper. Mr M'Eae said it was exorbitant. Witness pointed out that it was made by the shipping agent. Mr Morten was satisfied. The next time witness was called in was to get instructions from Mr King, in Morten's presence, to make up accounts for a final settlement, -And. to have them ready for the following morning. Mr King said,in Morten's presen ee, V -ftatauthe items had been passed by Mr only Mr Mortem objected to au ,-Kfeof £7odd for advertising. Mr King * wfed witness to produce files of the newojjMtpers showing the advertisements. Wit-

ness said there was only an incomplete file of the Press and no copies of the Times in the office. Mr Morten suggested that witness should go with him to inspect the Times' file. Mr King objected to the amount of labour for so small an affair. Mr Morten made a very aggravating remark, to the effect that Mr King was piling up charges, and that it would be worth hiß (Mr Morten's) while to spend two days in investigating such an account, meaning the advertising account. Mr King got rather angry, but, after some conversation, cooled down. It was arranged that witness should make out the accounts as agreed, and meantime try and satisfy Mr Morten las to the advertising. Mr King got up ! from his deßk to lock it and hurry away to an engagement. Mr Morten made a very offensive remark to the effect that he hoped Mr King would put no delay in the way of settlement next day. In consequence of that Mr King got very angry, and spoke hastily to Mr Morten, who then asked witness for the paper on which the memoranda had been made. He put it in his pocket, saying he would not now leave such a paper in his (Mr King's) hands, and that a settlement would have to be made through his lawyers. Mr Morten then left. Cross-examined : I was present at a previous conversation in Mr King's office. To my mind Mr .King was wonderfully plasid under great provocation. Mr Morten lost his temper at the end, but previously was very insulting. I can't remember the language Mr King used. It was not profane. I should be very happy to tell you if I could remember the words. Mr King told Morten he was not fit to be Hornsby's agent. That was my opinion too. At 445 p.m. the Court adjourned, by consent, till Monday next, at 10.30 a.m.