CIVIL CASE.

North Otago Times, Volume IV, Issue 65, 18 May 1865, Page 3

CIVIL CASE.

EVBRITT V. BltjnDEIiL. — Claim for £2, salvage of wool. Mr O'Meagher appeared for the defendant, and pleaded not indebted. Thomas Everitfc, plaintiff, examined on oath.— Un 6th inst., between 4 and 5 a.m., he was walking alone; the beach, when he saw a quantity of wool thero which the water was washing at times ; he got it up beyond water-mark, and on enquiry he found that it belonged to Messrs Royse, Mudie and Co. ; he Went to Mr Blundell, their manager, and asked him for some recompense for securing it. Mr Blundell refused, and threatened to give him in. charge for interfering with it. An objection was taken on behalf of the defendant that the action was raised against the wrong party, but -waived. ... , "Witness continued. — The wool was m danger, and would have gone to sea again if he had not taken it up. He considered it worth £6, and claimed one-third of the value. He had received no instructions to look out for wool belonging to Messrs Royse, Mudie and Co., nor any intimation up to that time from Mr Blundell not to do so. . .. Cross-examined.— He went in the morning to see if anything might have turned up — wool or anything else ; it was then about half high water. He did not count how many pieces, but there might be about 4 cwt. in all. He remembered being informed that Captain Sewell only had to do with the wool, and not to touch it; Mr Ashcroft was present. He went out to look for frost fish. Before this he and another man picked up a bale for Mr Ashcroft, who offered them £1 for doing so ; had also picked up some loose wool for him, and got for it 2d. per pound. For the defence, the point of law raised was—" That a man cannot entitle himself to salvage in respect to services which have been rendered contrary to the oxpress wishes and directions of the owner, and has no right to interfere with the persons employed by the owner to save the property." — Sutton v. Buckj 2, Taunt: 312. The defendant called as witnesses : — William Sewell, Beachinaster, Oamaru. — Ho was employed by Mr Ashcroft (of TrailL Roxby and Co.) to save all the wool belonging to his firm which had been in the Gazehound, and continued so employed. About the end of March, the plaintiff and some others interfered with the wool, upon which he (witness) asked Mr Ashcroft to interpose, who then prohibited any of them from touching it, and left it entirely in witness's hands. The witness said that the tide on the morning of tho 6th instant would, between 5 and 6, bo about ebb, and that when it flowed it would have a tendency to float up the wool, which might be in some danger, but not much. James Ashcroft.— What passed on the beach on the occasion before alluded to was:— He had made an arrangement with Captain Sewell to save the wool, and he distinctly stated to the persons present that they were not to interfere with it. He made a separate arrangement about scattered wool, for which he offered to pay 2d. per lb. when brought in ; but as to bales or portions of bales, it was intimated that Captain Sewell was to have sole charge. It appeared that Messrs Traill, Roxby and Co. had recently made over their right to Messrs Royse, Mudio and Co. Alex. Monteith.— Had seen the portion of the bale referred to ; considered that there was about a third of a bale, and at 4d. per lb. he valued it at about £2 10s. B. Blundell, the defendant. - -Did not recognise any one but Captain Sewell as having any right to interfere with the wool belonging to his firm. Judgment for the defendant, with 13s. 6d. costs.