Resident Magistrate's Court.
THIS DAY. (Before H. A. Stratford, Esq., R.M.) CIVIL CASES. "VVm. Grant v. John Hanning—Claim, L2 19s 4d, goods supplied. Judgment for amount claimed, with costs 6s. Mary Massey v. James Familton, jun. —Claim, L2 6s, board, and 7s, borrowed money. Mr Lee (Hislop and Creagh) appeared for defendant, and pleaded not indebted, and also infancy. His Worship gave judgment for defendant, after hearing evidence. Oamaru Coal Importing Company v. Malcolm M'Kellar; claim L 27 14s Bd. Mr Newton for plaintiffs, Mr Harvey for defendant. PeterOrr, managerof the Oamaru Coal Importing Company (Messrs Lintott, Skeet, and Dennison), stated that the coal mentioned in the bill of particulars had been supplied to Mr M'Kellar. The coal was charged at regular rates, as was also the railage. To Mr Harvey : The coals were charged originally to M'Kellar, but were transferred subsequently to Mr Dennison. He produced the day book, showing that the coals were charged to defendant, on October 31st, 1891. He sent the account to defendant on November Ist. He produced the ledger, show • ing that the. coals had been charged to defendant, and also to Mr T. C. Dennison on two occasions. Re-examined: It was not till three months after the transaction that the credit entry in M'Kellar's account was debited to T. C. Dennison. He did not know who authorised him to make the entry. Mr Skeet authorised him to make an entry debiting Mr M'Kellar again with the coals, after they had been transferred to Mr Dennison. To the Bench : He was of opinion that the entry charging Mr Dennison with the coal was authorised by Mr Deuchrass. Malcolm M'Kellar stated that he had purchased the coal from Mr Dennison. He knew there was a coal company, and understood that Messrs Skeet and Lintott -were members of the company. He did not dispute the price or the railage. He made a special arrangement with Mr Dennison at the time that Mr Dennison's man (Doyle) should cart the coal from the railway to the station. This was done, and he paid Doyle for the carting. He received an account for the coal, and wrote to Mr Dennison sending 9s 4d in settlement of the account, there being a contra account for royalty on stone of L 27 4s Bd. He charged royalty on account of Robert Campbell and Son. The coal was purchased by him for that firm. The royalty was owing by Mr Dennison. He saw Mr Dennison subsequently after getting a notice from the Coal Company in April. This was the first notice he received after writing to Mr Dennison in December. The accounts ■were"rendered to him personally, but he did not recollect if the first was rendered to him or Robt. Campbell and Son. He asked Mr Dennison why the matter was not squared. Mr Dennison said he had received no balance and the account had not been settled. He asked one of his clerks and the clerk said that the account had been settled. Mr Dennison. then said this was the first he had heard of it. Shortly after the 9s 4d was returned. To Mr Harvey : He sent Mr Dennison an account for the stone, which was not answered. He saw Mr Dennison subsequently, and Mr Dennison informed him that there was a coal account to go a°ainst it. He • assented to this. Mr Deunison afterwards sent in an account for L6O for opening up a quarry. He knew nothing whatever of this account-.
R. C. Skeeb stated that he ordered the reversal of the entry which credited Mr : M'Kellar with a debit against Mr Dennison. He never authorised a debit of the account to Mr Dennison. To Mr Harvey.: The matter was brought under his notice by Mr Brook-Smith. To the Bench: He ordered the reveiaal of the entry as soon as he found it, with the consent of Mr Dennison, who denied having authorised the entry. : Mr Lintott, the remaining partner, ratified the action afterwards. His impression was that the coal was ordered for the station by Mr M'Kellar, as manager for Robert Campbell and Son. T. C. Dennison denied that there w«s any arrangement made with Mr M'Kellar to set one account against another. He was away from the office when Mr M'Kellar's letter arrived, and he did not open it. When his client informed him of the letter he told him that there was no arrangement. Turning to his ledger, he found in Messrs Campbell and Son's account there was a credit of 9s 4d set against a debit of L 3 7s 6d. As the ?s 4d was sent there was no option but to place the amount to their credit. When he received the cheque from Mr Begg to settle his claim for surveys he returned the 9s 4d. After the credit had been made in the Coal Company's books, Mr Skeet asked him if he had authorised the credit to be made, and witness replied he had not, neither did he know it had been done. To Mr Harvey : He thought he was in a better position now than in December. The Doaks had sued him since then. He did not remember any conversation with Mr M'Kellar in November about the accounts. He denied having one with him. Although the credit of 9a 4d was made in his books in December, he knew nothing of it until May. He knew from his diary that he was in the country when M'Kellar's letter arrived. Turning up the diary, he found that he was at Papakaio. Upon returning, his . book-keeper did not inform him that Mr M'Kellar had sent 9s 4d. In a former account he paid Ll4 16s 7d royalty to Mr M'Kellar on an order of Mr Doak's. This was on the 16th November, 1891, and was for food supplied to Mr Doak, he believed. Witness admitted owing L 27 4s 8d to Messrs Campbell and Sons for royalty. He was not suing the firm. He was willing to settle with Messrs Campbell and Son when their account was sent in. His book-keeper simply informed him that Mr M'Kellar had forwarded 9s 4d and that he had placed it to Messrs Campbell's credit. Witness had never told Mr Orr to charge him with coal supplied to Messrs-Camp-bell and Son, and he could nob explain why Mrs Orr, who kept the books, had charged him with it. He supposed someone must have done so. There were four persons who could have told her, viz., Mr Lintott, Mr Skeet, witness and his clerk ; or Mr M'Kellar might have done so. Mr Lintott did not know of any arrangement between him and Mr M'Kellar, neither did Mr Skeet. Looking up the Coal Company s book, witness found that the coal supplied to Messrs Campbell and Sons was charged to him on the 20th January. Mr Skeet was not looking over the books then, as he was ill. To the Bench : Witness said this was the only transaction the Coal Company had had with Messrs Campbell and Son, and he remembered Mr M'Kellar coming, as manager at Otekaike, to order the coals. Mr M'Kellar had previously dealt with Mv Orr. P. Orr, recalled, said that some time after the coal was sent to Otekaike he saw Mr M'Kellar in the street; and asked him about the account for the coal. Mr M'Kellar replied that he was going to settle with Mr Dennison. John Deuchrass said that on the arrival of Mr M'Kellar s letter Mr Dennison was away, and on his return he asked him if he was to put the account through their books and Mr Dennison said not. He never gave Mr Orr any instructions to charge coal supplied to Messrs Campbell and Son, to them. To Mr Harvey : Witness said, the credit on October 31st, 1891, of Ll4 16s 7d, given to Messrs Campbell and Sons, in Mr Dennison's books, was for royalty. To Mr Newton : Witness said the credit of Ll4 16s 7d was simply a cross entry, it had never been paid. This was the case for the claimants, Mr Harvey called T. C. Dennison, who said that the amount of Ll4 16s 7d had been credited and debited in Messrs Campbell and Son's account, but it had nob been paid. This closed the evidence, and counsel addressed the Court upon the points of law. His Worship asked if Mr M'Kellar was to be made personally liable. Mr Newton said that that point had never been raised, but if it were lie would ask for a nonsuit. He understood that it was to be defended by Mr M'Kellar on behalf of his principals. Mr Harvey said that he intended to take advantage of every technicality. Mr Newton then accepted a nonsuit. His Worship said it did not appear from the evidence that any arrangement had been made with Mr Dennison that the coal should go as a set-off against the royalty on stone. He thought the case had been brought against the wrong person, as he considered that Mr M'Kellar was not personally liable. As the case, if brought up again, in all probability would be heard by another Magistrate, he thought it right he should say that if it had been brought against the proper parties, that the plaintiffs would be entitled to judgment. Mr Harvey asked for costs, which were allowed to the amount of LI lis 6d. LARCENY. W. J. Spedding, on remand from Dunedin, was charged with the larceny on the 31st May at Toko-Ralii of a saddle valued at 30s, the property of Richard Richmond. Accused admitted the offence. Detective O'Brien, in answer to the Bench, said that the saddle had been restored to the owner. His Worship said that, considering the time the accused had already been in custody, the case would be met by his sentencing him to seven days in the Oamaru Gaol, with hard labor.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/OAM18920726.2.35
Bibliographic details
Oamaru Mail, Volume XVII, Issue 5336, 26 July 1892, Page 3
Word Count
1,661Resident Magistrate's Court. Oamaru Mail, Volume XVII, Issue 5336, 26 July 1892, Page 3
Using This Item
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.