TOWN EDITION.

Marlborough Express, Volume XLIII, Issue 116, 14 May 1909, Page 8

TOWN EDITION.

'MAGISTRATES COURT.

Mr T. Scott-Smith, S.M.)

UNDEFENDED CASES

Judgment by default was entered against defendants in the following undefended cases:—D. M. Foote (Mr Geo. Rogers) v. Charles Tiller, claim £43 4s lid; Geo. Ckeesman (Mr Bogers) y: A. G. Bavies, claim £i 10s; H. F. Hall (Mr Conolly) v. John Carter, claim £2 Os.ld. ' A DISPUTED ACCOUNT. . A. Rayner (Mr G. Rogers) v. Owen Newport (Mr Churchward), claim £,18 2s 3d, goods sold and delivered. A sum of £7 4s was paid into Court in full satisfaction of the claim. Mr Rogers said most of the account was a simple debt, but one or two items he would like to point out. In August plaintiff said that if he feot defendant's custom two months ior one month to other purveyors _he would give the goods at Is per dozen, the market price being Is 6d per dozen. An account was rendered for September at Is per dozen and paid. The next account was for November, and as Newport had broken the agreement he was cliarged Is 6a per dozen. Since then he had not supplied any more aerated waters to Mr Newport. Plaintiff gave evidence in support of the facts put forward by Mr Rogers. The arrangement was for two months' custom in succession. For this a concession was given of 6d per dozen. If he had received the two months' successive custom he would have charged Is per dozen; but not otherwise. Mr Newport did not give him the two months' successive custom.

To Mr Churchward: He was to have"two months to everybody else's one month. Mr Newport had made a slight complaint,, but that was soon remedied. He did not supply Newport in October. Witness had been ill, and the.stuff for one day was not up to the mark. This had been remedied, and a replacement made. He supplied cordials in November, end Mr Newport complained. He took the stuff back and sold it again. This 23 dozen was not included in the account. Witness only supplied one other hotel at Is per dozen. He only supplied this hotel for one month. Mr Rogers objected to a question whether this particular hotel was dissatisfied, and his Worship upheld th* objection. y -\

Witness conJiijjpiued. The September account at Is per dozen was paid. He reckoned he was going to get the November and December custom, or he would not have rendered the September account at Is per dozen. Newport went round and, told everybody he was getting supplied at Is per dozen.

F_rank Dodson said the market price of seratcd waters was Is 6d per dozen, with the usual discount. If the accounts were promptly paid it worked out at Is 3d per dozen. The quality of cordial would have to be the best. Mr Newport had obtained cordials from him in September and October.

Mr Churchward said the defence was that the arrangement was at Is per dozen, and no condition was made for two months' custom. The Is per dozen was to be cash. Defendant had reason to complain of the quality of the goods supplied. In answer to His Worship Mr Churchward said defendant had paid "the account when it was rendered. It could not be the defendant's fault if the account was only rendered one year after.

Mr Churchward, continuing, said that plaintiff said the stuff would he better in future, and defendant had given him a turn in November.

Owen Newport deposed that' he dealt with plaintiff during July and August. In August plaintiff arranged to supply cordials at Is per dozen. There were no conditions whatever. The Ist per dozen was clear; no discount. There was no agreement to the effect' that plaintiff was to receive two successive months' custom. Plaintiff supplied him in September, and the quality was not* good. Witness complained, and plaintiff said it was a put-up job with the other firms. This was the reason he went elsewhere for cordials in October. Plaintiff said something went wrong with his machinery, and the stuff would be all right in future, and he pleaded for another trial. In November he gave plaintiff another trial, but the stuff was no better. He had to return the stuff to Rayner and get some more from Dodson. Plaintiff did not bring his account for three months after it was due. He would have been paid whenever he asked for it. Witness had a contra account of £2 18s against Rayner. The account was in his barman's pocket-book, and his barman was in the North Island. He did not think the account would be disputed. . Mr Rogers said the account would Ife disputed. They had no particulars of the account.

Witness went on to say that the stuff supplied to Rayner was taken away at. various times, and was not consumed, on the premises. To Mr Rogers: The arrangement ior Is per dozen was made by plaintiff himself. Witness complained about the July and August supply. - His Worship : Have you any' reason why Rayner should supply you at ]s per dozfn?

Witness said that Kayner never had any money in his pocket to speud in the bar 3 and he reduced his price ior that reason. Witness could get supplied now at Is per dozen. Dcdson would not supply at'that figure; his was a superior article. Witness had been plaintiff's best friend. He had given him bottles and barrels and various things, and then he treated him in the way he had done. if plaintiff disputed the contra account he was welcome to it. He had made tip tho account against Rayner aiid told him the amount. Ho did not render him an account. These bar accounts were debts of honour, and only the totals were given. If llayner repudiated the account v.itnoss would wipe it off. Plaintiff admitted owing a little over £2. He would say about £2. He would admit that amount. His Worship gave judgment for plaintiff for the amount claimed, less the £2 contra account admitted.