A SHARE TRANSACTION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLVII, Issue 14507, 22 October 1910, Page 5

A SHARE TRANSACTION.

BROKER'S SUCCESSFUL CLAIM.

LOSS ON MARKR'N TURBINES.

The case in which Joseph Thornes, sharebroker, sued Dr. Hugh Keith, for £115 15s, was concluded in the Magistrate's Court yesterday, before Mr. ('. C. Kettle, S.M. The claim was for the price of 50 shares in Marks's High-speed Reversible Turbine Company, which plaintiff had purchased for defendant at .£2 (is per share. The defendant counter-claimed for £123 15s, alleging that. through plaintiff's neglect- to sell the shares on a falling market, as instructed, defendant had suffered a loss of £8 15s, in addition to the sum of £115 to be paid for the shares. Mr Cotter appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. Hill for the defence.

Samuel Herbert Harrison, sliarebroker, stated that Dr. Keith had had share transactions with him. If told by a client to sell shares on a falling market ho would sell as soon as the shares got a little lower. It was not an unusual thing for witness to get instructions to sell on a falling market.

To Mr. Hill: Dr. Keith had never attempted to repudiate any transactions with witness.

Joseph Thornes, the plaintiff, stated that he was not present when instructions were given for the shares to be bought. Witness detailed a conversation lie had with Dr. Keith, stating that the latter had said lie partly blamed witness's son for putting him in tho position of having to lose on the shares. After some further conversation as to what had taken place between Dr. Keith find witness's son, Dr. Keith said to witness, "If you think there is likely to be a further drop it might be better to sell. What do you think Witness replied, " Now, doctor, you want me to keep them for you if they are going to advance, and cell them for you if they are going to fall, but, unfortunately, 1 cannot see far enough into the future to do this." Witness then asked Dr. Keith if he would sell at a specified price, and Dr Keith said he would jNeep them a little longer and see how tho market went. Witness had no interest in refraining from selling shares when he received instruct ions.

Ralph Thornes, plaintiff's son, in the course of his evidence, stated that Dr. Keith had said to him, " If you see any inclination for the market to drop ring me up, and I'll instruct you about same." Witness had no authority front Dr. Keith to sell the shares.

The magistrate said there was no reason to reserve his judgment. 'The question was: Did Dr. Keith, on August 8, give to his broker definite instructions to sell the shares on the first sign of a falling market ? The onus of proof rested on Dr. Keith, and he had not satisfied His Worship that the instructions were really given. Judgment had previously been given for plaintiff in the claim, and Dr. Keith, tho plaintiff in tho counter-claim, was non-suited, the costs to be settled in chambers.