MAGISTERIAL.

Marlborough Express, Volume XXV, Issue 17, 21 January 1889, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

4 (Before Mr J. Allen, E.M.) CARD V. GREEN AND NOSWORTHY. The following is the continuation of the case on Saturday. E For the defence the following evidence b was called : — j S. Kabone said the firm used to keep I pianos. The piano m question stood ; where the previous one had stood, not . behind a partition but under a show cade. I Spoke to Card about getting a new piano 5 for sale, and Card shortly after ordered i the instrument. Took lessons on it, and I used often to play on it. As you say, it [ was customary m those days to relieve , " dull care" with music (laughter). The ; piano went to Miss Card's house for a few i months. Many people asked what the • selling price was. Should have sold it if anyone had put down the deposit of £10. Had some conversation with Green and Nosworthy. The getting of the piano to the auction room was a bit of quiet work (laughter). Know nothing of that. The rough cash book was kept at both shops. Card used to have access to the books. After the sale Miss Card said the piano . was hers. Knew nothing of the piano being Miss Card's till then told. To Mr Dean : We had had one piano before this. Card used to get goods and supply the shop. He never used to pledge his personal security for purchase. Card ordered it m my presence. Know lam on my oath. We were all talking about the ordering of a piano, and I feel sure I actually heard the order given. I swear I paid Mr Cullimore for the tuning, on behalf of the firm. A piano deteriorates if subjected to daily practice. I completed

ray studies on that. Unfortunately my teacher cleared out (laughter). I used to participate m the jollities with violin and piano, for I played the cornet, and we used to practice for Ethiopian .concerts (laughter). The piano was m •the shop behind a glass case. I knew nothing of the sale of the piano, and when I found it out I made no fuss. We owed the firm of Green and Nosworthy something. Card and Eabone gave no instructions for the sale. Card and Eabone never paid for the piano. Ido not know whether the piano was on our stock sheets. No money passed between us and Green and Nosworthy about the furniture. I went to Green and Nosworthy after the sale and I gave a receipt for the money, under the belief that it was sold for the firm. Notwithstanding the letter I had written to Card, I had no objection to the money being placed against the liability. I did not expect to see Green and Nosworthy putting m an execution, but I thought they might to recover rent. I am not on the very best of terms with Miss Card. She left as a matter of economy. Re-examined: I did not consult Card about everything. All the things m the shop except the bodies of the partners were for sale at marked prices. Had I known the piano was Miss Card's I should not have given a receipt. To the Bench : I cannot say how we arrived at the price £42. E. D. Nosworthy gave evidence. His firm had no instructions to pay the proceeds of the sale to anyone m particular. The bill was for money lent, and not for rent. The rent was safe, and there were plenty of goods to distrain upon m the event of its not being paid. If witness had been instructed to pay the money to Miss Card he would have done so. Considered Mr Card's name was good for the rent. To Mr Dean : Eabone never saw me before the sale of the piano. He presumed the furniture was Card's, but did not know where the piano came from. We were not pushing Card and Eabone for the rent at the time. Whenever Eabone came into the office he always referred to the piano as Card and Eabone's. F. M. Nairn, clerk to Green and Nosworthy, entered the piano transaction m the cash book. Had no instructions from Miss Card that separate accounts were to be rendered. To Mr Dean : I think I received the goods at the auction mart. lam certain 'the carter did not say the goods belonged to Miss Card. J. B. Green gave similar evidence. This was the case, and Mr {Sinclair asked for an adjournment until Monday morning, His reason for doing so was that he intended to take some time m addressing the Court, as the action was indirectly an attack on the good faith of his clients, and he would therefore like to do the case every justice. The adjournment was granted and the Court rose. THIS DAY. On the Court resuming this morning, Counsel addressed the Bench. His Worship m giving judgment pointed out that this was a case of agency, not of auctioneering. His Worship called It. D. Nosworthy and asked whether he (Mr Nosworthy) was the person with whom the arrangement was made. Mr Nosworthy replied m the negative. He did not quite remember what passed, or when and where it passed. Judgment was reserved till two o'clock, and the Court rose at 11.45 till that hour. On the Court resuming at 2 o'clock, His Worship gave judgment. He reviewed the evidence very carefully, and said it was not an auctioneering case m the ordinary sense of the term. The question of furniture was mixed up m it, but he should confine himself to the piano. Mr Nosworthy, it seems, was informed m a general way that the piano and furniture were to be sold. Card gave no personal instructions ; he afterwards said the piano belonged to his daughter, that the piano > was not for sale, and that it was removed to the cottage, thence to the auction rooms. Card did not tell Eabone of the affair. He instructed his daughter to sell. The plaintiff said she gave instructions to a person at Green and Nosworthy's to sell, but this was not confirmed by the other side. Eabone told Green and Nosworthy that the piano belonged to the firm ; he fixed the price and gave a receipt for the money. He did not consult Card or complain of the removal. Mr Nosworthy distinctly said Eabone claimed the piano as the firm's. His Worship was of opinion (1) that defendants received it for sale, (2) , that they were afterwards told it was the firms and treated it as such, (3) that they were not negligent. He should therefore non-suit the plaintiff with costs. The Clerk said there were no Court Court costs, and Mr Sinclair asked for a professional fee £3 3s. His Worship granted this. ' Mr Dean objected that the amount was under £50, and the £3 3s fee too high. His Worship, hawever, allowed the fee, and the Court adjourned.