Forest Hill Lime Case.

Otautau Standard and Wallace County Chronicle, Volume I, Issue 20, 12 September 1905, Page 3

Forest Hill Lime Case.

VERDICT FOR PLAINTIFFS.

On Thursday, September Bth, at the Gore Magistrates' Court, Mr Cruiokshank, S M , delivered judgment m the case J. E. Watson and Co. (Mr Inder) v. Southland Farmers' Co-op Asssociatlon (Messrs W. Y. H. Hall and E. C. Smith). This wag an action brought to recover the price of certain lime supplied to the defendants, who objected to pay for it on the ground that ihey were not supplied With the proper lime ordered^-carbonate of lime being delivered instead of caustic lime. The Magistrate went into the question exhaustively, and detailed the various transactions between the plaintiffs and the defendants. The plaintiffs had offered to supply Forest Hill lime, " ground ," at 20s per ton, and the defendants had ordered 80 tons. The first six tons were shown on the invoice to be "ground" lime, but the four other lot were for " carbonate of lime." It was this carbonate of lime which the plaintiffs delivered purporting lobe m compliance with the orders received for crushed lime. The defendants, • however, did not reject the goods, but accepted them and refold them to various sub-purchaserg. These latter did pot reject either, but accepted and used the ! carbonate of lim« so delivered to them. The contract forth* supply of caustic lima was . n^ e a°t tho^ c °* lime ™«. substituted,^ the tendering of the carbonate of lime was a proposal for a new contract m Sri?" 10 V - the M ° ne ' ** tie carbonate of W the defendants 'accepted 22nd nf i-° f Pl s inliffi3 to BU W ] y * hat • &1 lme . mßt ? ad of ca « sti °. ™<* nra* mSkS? f* y ? r tb t carbon^« ot lime at the «£% ra ?«nlesstbey ; could prove that it aZ^u* 1D - qnality ' Voluminous eviagainst the carbonate Q f lime, bat the court held

c I'aiewe of exceptional quality ns carbenate of lims and readily saleable at £20 per ton. Defendants could not be allowed to experiment with it and then afterwards disclaim any liability because it did not produce as good a. crop as they expeoted. Judgment w\s therefore given for the plaintiffs for the amount claimed, without interest, and a counter-claim was dismissed. Costs were entered un os follows : —Witness-is' expanses £21 B<s 3.1, costs of adjournment £2 18 3 Bd, coWt costs C 2 14s, solicitors' fe^s £3 133, andjnlgment for £2;" 3» 6d— a total of £55 17s s>l. Lnave to nppoil was granted, fourteen days being allow d.