A SHEEP DEAL.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVII, Issue 17587, 18 September 1917, Page 7

A SHEEP DEAL.

CIiAIM FOR £1753-

OURTH DAT’S PROCEEDINGS.

“he fourth day of the hearing of the m for £1753 9s 2d, brought by ’id Ramsey Hutchison, farmer and epdealer, Wbiterock, against Edward Broughton, farmer and sheeplor, Southbridgo and Biccarton, was en at the Supremo Court yesterday oro his Honor Mr Justice Denniston a special jury of twelve. The Natal Mortgage and Agency Company, . was joined as third party.

it the previous sittings Mr Raymond, j.. with him Mr Neave, appeared the plaintiff, Mr Skerrett, K.C., h him Sir Wright for the defendant, l Mr H. D. Acland for the National rtgago Company. At yesterday’s sitf it was 'announced that Mr Skerrett f to .leave for tire north by Saturday ning’3 ferry steamer, and that Mr ive would be unable to attend, Mr gent being now associated with Mr vmond. '

ho public attendance yesterday was 1 maintained.

'he plaintiff’s case was that the deda nt had contracted to purchase in rein her last 3000 Romney cross ewes 295, delivery in March. Defendant [ repudiated the sheep on arrival, on ground of misrepresentation. The mnt claimed was tho difference been the contract price ‘and the prohs of the sheep when sold at Addmg- . plus freight and* other charges.

FENDANT’S CASE CONTINUED. >aniel Coleman, sheep dealer and chet;, Redcliffs, said that he nnder>d a Romney cross ewe to bo tho geny of a long-woolled ram and a f-bred ewe. It would not bo cor-

rcct to describe a half-bred as a Romney cross. He saw the sheep at Addington, and if he had to soil them he would describe them as half-bred with 20 per cent of come-backs. Had he bought the sheep as Romney cross ewes he would not have accepted delivery. There was no slump in ewes in March. The lambs went back. To Mr Raymond: A Oomedale was any sort of breed, and bred a mongrel 6ort of sheep. To his Honor: The sheep were offered to him, but he first wired to Blenheim and inquired the breeding. He did not accept the sheep. He had been informed, that Corriedale rams had been Used. Mr Wright: When you were offered the sheep how *were they described? Witness: I prefer not to answer that question, as it would affect my business.

His Honor,: I .do not see any why you should not answer. The inquiry was not pursued by counsel.

William Thomas Turner, stock agent at Rakaia for the New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Company, Ltd., gave evidence of an expert character, and said that he did not regard the sheep as Romney cross ewes. To Mr Raymond: Romneys were more in evidence south of the Rakaia than north of the river. James Robert Cullen said that he regarded 50 per oent of the sheep as quarter-backs. Ho would not regard a half-bred as a Romney cross. To Mr Raymond: The Corriedale was a good sort of sheep. His Honor: I’m glad Ho hear that the Corriedale has some friend, x To Mr Wright: There v/as a tendency in the Corriedalo to throw back to tho merino. Ho therefore considered culling was necessary to the extent of 50 per cent. George Shipley, Harewood Road, said that he would describe the sheep as half-bred or inbred half-bred- Ninety per cent were inbred. His Honor: The poor sheep won’t be left with a shred of character. (Laughter.) Raymond Fletcher Fold, farmer, Rakaia Island, said that he was recently in the employ of defendant.' At the clearing sole at Oxford at the end of November last, witness attended . with the defendant. Woods (the auctioneer for the National Mortgage Company) told Broughton that he had 3000 threo-quarter-bred sheep, Romney cross, for sale, at 295, suitable for the . North Island. " Witness understood that Broughton had bought the sheep. Nothing was said about the delivery of the sheep, except that witness inquired of Woods how much it would cost to bring the sheep down. Woods replied about 2s 6d a head, but he did not think there would be any necessity to bring them down as they would he sold to the North Island. In March, when the sheep were at Addington, witness went to the yards, and inspected them. He subsequently told Broughton what he thought of them. Witness and Woods went to the pens later, and Woods expressed his disappointment with the sheep, declaring that he had thought they wore three-quarter-bred, but had not said so, describing them as Romney cross. Witness regarded the sheep as mostly half-bred and comeback. From the conversation at Oxford he had expected to see big strong-woolled sheep. That completed the case for the defendant. EXPERT EVIDENCE FOR 1 PLAINTIFF.

By permission, tho plaintiff was al-

lowed to call export evidence in relU Mr Wright formally objected, on the ground that it was not to be evidence in rebuttal, but was supplementary. Bernard fa-ipp, sheeptarmcr, limaru, at stock .sales m South Canterbury, and for many past had acted as a iudge in the sheep masses at leading Canterbury shows. The Romney type of sheep was not general m North Can-ti-bury but frequent in the south. At his station they had had Romneys for many years. At Oran Gorge they had first put the Romneys to tho merino ewes, but nowadays put them to tbo Corriedale. He considered tho Corriedalo a very satisfactory sheep. He was famihar with the dealings in Romneys. A half-bred Romney would be correctly described as Romney cross. If ho had contracted to sell Romney cross ho would certainly includo halfbreds. A quarter-back could be describ-, ed as Romney cross, but if he wero asked for details he would mention that they were quarter-backs. If one was offered Romney cross, one would naturally ask what cross, three-quar-ter. half or quarter. Tho sheep, the subject of the action, could bo described as Romney cross, judging by the evidence of the witness Phillips as to the breeding. The Corriedalo was an established class, and had now about thirty-five generations. They wore originally known as in-bred half-breds. At the Orari Gorge station they put Corriedalo owes to Corriedalo rams and also to Romney rams. It was difficult at drafting timo to know what lambs w©ro Romneys* To Mr Wright): If ho wero offered Romney cross, he would nob purchase until he had a full description. Ho would expebb at least an equal part of the Romney in a Romney cross. Continuing, witness said that when tho Corriedales were first established thev threw back to the merino very much but now the breed was more established tho culling was not extenSl His Honor: It has ceased to be a parvenu and is now admitted to decent society ? Mr Wright: Have you heard that the Now Zealand Land Company is giving up Corriedales? , Witness: I have not heard so, and cannot believe it. John Stringfellow, sheep breeder, Ashburton, said that Hie term Romney cross applied to totally different sheep. He would not bo satisfied, when buying sheep, with the, term. He agreed entirely "with Mr Tripp’s evidence.

COUNSEL’S ADDRESS. Immediately after tho luncheon adjournment, Mr "Wright addressed ‘the jury on behalf of the defendant, his speech extending over two hours and a half.

THE ISSUES. The following issues were agreed upon to be placed beforo the jury:— (1) Did the plaintiff by bis agents on the treaty for 'the sale of the ewes, represent and describe such ewes as (a) three-quarter-bred Romney ewes? (I>) strong-woolled sheep? (e) suitable for the North Island? (d) Romney cross ewes P

(2) Was the defendant induced Ho buy the owes by all or any of the representations contained in the above issues, and. if so, by which of them? (3) Did the description Romney cross ewes mean according to trade usage, in Canterbury ‘that the ewes were either threc-quarter-bred Romneys or the progeny of a cross by a Romney ram in which the Romney blood predominated to a greater extent than in a half-bred ewe?

(.3a) Did the. defendant understand the term Romney cross when used by the plaintiff’s agents as meaning a sheep in which the Romney blood predominated to a greater extent than in a half-bred?

(4) Were the ewes shipped’ substantially different from what they were represented to be? (5) Were the 2663 ewes shipped accepted by the defendant in performance of the contract?

(6) Did the ewes shipped consist of half-bred owes and a substantial number of comeback ewes?

(7) W ere the ewes shipped (a) strongVooiled sheep? (b) suitable for the North Island P ■_ (8) Did tho defendant authorise the National Mortgage Company to arrange for tho shipment, of tho ©wes from Pohenui wharf to Lyttelton? (9) If No. Bis answered in'the affirmative, did the company so arrange? (10) Did the company pay for, and with the consent of tho defendant, (a) freight, insurance, wharfage and Borough Council charges? (b) receiving, tailing and paddockmg charges P (11) Did the defondant on March 14, 1917,. inform the- National Mortgago Company that the sheep were not according to description, and that ho would not accept them? (12) Did tho'defendant use reasonable promptitude in rejecting the ewes? (13) What was the difference in value between tho ewes as described and represented by the plaintiff’s agent,'and those shipped? (14) (a) Were tho ewes shipped of a merchantable quality? (L) If not, by what sum ought tho contract price to bo reduced?

The Court adjourned till 10.30 a.m. on the following day.