FARM SALE DISPUTE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18348, 14 March 1923, Page 7

FARM SALE DISPUTE.

CLAIM FOR £3000 DAMAGES.

MATTER OF REPRESENTATION

PLAINTIFF'S CASE CONTINUED.

The hearing of the claim for damages in connection with the sale of an 857-acro farm at Kaipara Flats was continued before Mr. Justice Herdman and a jury, in tho Supreme Court, yesterday. The plaintiff, Richard Barrer, farmer, of Kaipara Flats .(Mr. Towle), sued Joh'.i Taylor, retired farmer, of Auckland (Mr. Leary and Mr. Ferner), for £3000 damages, alleging there had been misrepresentation by defendant or his agent in regard (1) to the carrying capacity of the property; (2) to the farm being ring-fenced; and (3) to the amount of noxious weed. The defence was a general denial of the allegations of misrepresentation. H. J, C. Coutts, officer in charge of the Government Valuation Department at Auckland, stated that the valuation of the property, made oh March 31, 1920, was £7550. Alice E. Barrer, wife of plaintiff, stated that during the past twto seasons her husband had worked from 4 a.m. to 9 p.m. He had been milking 16 cows this year without assistance. Georgo W. Vermeil stated that he came to Auckland in December, 1919, and had been farming land adjacent to that owned' by plaintiff. Witness spent only about two hours in inspecting the two properties. From what witness had seen of plaintiff's property, he thought it would carry about 500 sheep and from 70 to 80 head of cattle. The property had not gone back since plaintiff Sought, it. Ho would say that £7 10s per acre was the outside valuation in 1919, and plaintiff had paid £12. If the place had been able to carry 1200 sheep and 110 cattle it would bo worth anything between £12 and £14. Cross-examined, witness could not say that the casual inspection he had n.ade was in any way due to defendant, The fences he saw were in bad condition. Duncan Guy, a retired farmer living at Remuera, said ho had owned tho property bought bv the previous witness for 13 years. At the time of the sale defendant's farm was not ring-fenced. The property was not divided small enough into paddocks to permit of heavy stocking. There was blackberry "here and there and all over." At the time of the sale defendant had, he believed, about 1100 sheep and some cattle. Witness bed never seen so much, stock on the place before. He considered the property had averaged about 400 sheep and about 110 head of cattle during the 13 years he was there. Cross-examined, witness said he valued defendant's property at £7 an aero. Adam D. Martin, an adjoining property owner, said he considered plaintiff gave £2 en acre too much. - John Davy Martin, another . fanner from the same district, said there was a lot of blackberry on the property. His valuation, as in 1919, was £6105. Thomas y Hanna, retired fanner and" valuer, stated that on January 24 and 25 he inspected plaintiff's property, in company, with . George W. Mace, another "valuer. They considered the carrying, capacity of the property in 1919 would : be 500 sheep and 75 head of cattle. The further hearing was adjourned until to-day.