AFLAX DISPUTE.

Mataura Ensign, 22 August 1907, Page 3

AFLAX DISPUTE.

JUDGMENT FOR PLAINTIFFS. At the Gore S.M. Court this morning m the previously heard case Nicholson Hros. (Messrs Neave and Smith) v. Paterson Hros. (Air Cochrane for Mr Inder). a claim of C7o, Air G. Cruiekslmnk, S.M., gave judgment as follows: This is a claim by three brothers, all young men, on an alleged contract by which the defendants were to pay £ls a ton lor certain flax delivered on railway truck. The facts are rather involved anil the whole question is one of credibility anil probability, as all the witnesses for the plaintiff are members of one family and all the witnesses for the defendants are brothers. It seems that the father and uncle of the plaintiffs had a contract with the defendants to deliver flax. This contract is embodied in a long formal agreement which set out all the arrangements, Ry this agreement Nicholsons, senior (as 1 term the uncle lather) purchased a block of land containing llax and obtaining financial help from Paterson bv way of having a bank overdraft guaranteed. and they agreed to give Paterson a royaltv of £2 10s per ton on all flax put out, as a commission for such assistance. Paterson received all the proceeds of the sale of the dressed flax and paid them into_ the guaranteed account at the bank, Nicholsons, senior, receiving an allowance of £lO » ton as a kind of living wage with which to carry on. This arrangement commenced in April, 1!'06, and continued till the end of the year, bv which time the overdraft, notwithstanding the proceeds for the flax sold which had been paid in against it, bad leached about £IOOO. The account had formerly been operated upon by Nicholson, but now Paterson took conilmiml of it. Soon after this the mill closed down and all the wages hands were paid_ off by cheques on this account Nicholson says that Paterson : 'tus'd to pay any more money as wages out of the guaranteed account, the limit being reached, and so he closed the mill. Paterson Hros. had a good contract with Wright. Stephenson ami Co. to,take good fair flax from them at £33 a ton up to the end of June. When the mill closed it contained five tons of partially dressed fibre.' It is now that the contradictory part of the story appears. The plaintiffs say. and in this they are corroborated by Nicholsons, senior, that they now arranged with Paterson to dress this five tons ready for market free of cost to Paterson, if Paterson would pay them £lo a ton for all further fibre delivered. Under this alleged agreement the partially-dressed flax has been scutched and railed away and five more tons have also been sent, for which the plaintiff's claim their flo a ton. On the other hand the Patersons point blank deny that they ever made any such arrangement as alleged the time alleged, although they admit they offered to increase to £l.j a ton the allowance to Nicholsons, senior, under the old agreement, which is still existing. The difference between the two agreements is this: that under the first the Patersons were simply financial helpers who sold the flax for them at £33 a ton, giving them £lO a ton to go on with, retaining £2 16s as commission and put the balance to the Nicholsons' credit ill the guaranteed account. Vnder this new agreement it was simply | a case of Inlying flax ready dressed fro.il these young plaintitfs at £ls a ton straight out. The Patersons could sell this at £33 a ton and keep all the profit themselves. Upon consideration of the endrnce I am of opinion that the plaintiffs are entitled to a declaration that fbe contract as alleged hy them was in (act made. I iit: was therefore in favor of plaintiff's, the amount to be fixed by the account sales from Wright, Steoheuson and Co. The case was formally adjourned to ascertain the. amount for which judgment would be gi von.