COAL MEASUREMENT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19321, 7 May 1926, Page 15

COAL MEASUREMENT.

USUAL,METHOD CHALLENGED COURT RESERVES DECISION. -t" - ■ The legality and accuracy of the customary method of measuring coal for delivery ex ship's slings was questioned by the defence in an action heard in the Magistrate's Court yesterday, before Mr. W. R. McKean, S.M. Redpath and Sons, Limited, coal merchants (Mr. Richmond), claimed from the Birkenhead and Northcote Gas Company, Limited (Mr. Kealy), £sl 6s, being the balance alleged to be due on shipments of. coal. The action arose out of a contract for the sale ex ship's slings of three shipments of coal by plaintiffs to defendants. The coal was loaded from the ships into barges, being measured by baskets, and liken to Birkenhead, where it was carried by motor-lorry to the Gas Company's works, where it was weighed. Defendants admitted receiving the shipments, but claimed thai in each case there was a shortage in tbe weight of the coal. Mr. Richmond said an important, principle was involved, as the defence was being raised that it was illegal under the Weights pd Measures Act to sell coal otherwise than by weight as actually measured, whereas it had been agreed between''plaintiffs and defendants that, 5 1-8 baskets ex ship's slings should be accepted as one ton. It' was a matter of practical impossibility to weigh coal on the ship s slings without enormously increasing the cost of delivery, said counsel. He contended the regulations under the Weights and Measures Act were intended to apply only to cases where coal was loaded on to vehicles which could.be driven on to a weigh bridge, but not to the case of delivery from one vessel direct into another." Apart from this aspect plaintiff contended the weighing of the coal at acfendaril's works some days after delivery ex ship's slings was not a fair test, as coal might have been lost in transit in various ways. Mr. Kealy claimed that the contract foV the sale of the coal was a contract for a definite tonnage and that any attempt to compel defendants trj accept the / hasis of basket measurement was illegal under the Act. Basket measurement was inconclusive and inaccurate, and in the circumstances the company's meaMirpr] weights were the only reliable weights before the Court. Evidence was given for plaintiffs that it was' customarv to measure coal exship's slings at the rate of five baskets to the ton, not only at the port of Auckland, but also throughout New Zealand. The weighing of the baskets would greatly delav ships and would increase the cost of delivery at least threefold. For the defence evidence was called to show that, various purchasers had refused to accept basket measurement as being inaccnnite, and that any loss of coal from the sling* to the gasworks would be j Email. The magistrate reserved his decision.