THE "PICTURESQUE ATLAS" CASES.

Otago Witness, Issue 1903, 24 July 1890, Page 31

THE "PICTURESQUE ATLAS" CASES.

A number of caies were set down for hearing at the Resident Magistrate's Court on Monday, in whioh the plaintiffs were William King Bowermun and Judah Philip Bowerman, publishers, of Wellington, trading as Bowermau Brothers, and the defendants certain settlers on the Peninsula, who were proceeded against for the recovery of sums alleged to be due on promissory notes given by defendants to plaintiffs in connfction with the "Pioturesque Atlas of Australaiia." The first case taken was that of BOWBRMAN V. COWAN,

in which the defendant;was sued for £3 9s, Sir Hobert Stout appeared tor the plaintiffs, and Mr Praser for the defendant. The first witness called was J. P. Bowerman, who said be was one of the firm of Bowerman Brothers, publishers, Wellington. He got a promissory note from the defendant, who signed it In his presence. The note had not been paid up When it was presented at the bank it was returned to him dishonoured. Cross-examined: Witness had been carrying on business in Wellington for two or three years. Before that he was In Australia, where he was engaged selling books for the Pioturesque Atlas Oompany. Mr Praser asked what was witness' connection with that company. Sir Bobert Stout desired to know what that had to do with the question. Surely it was not relevant. Mr Fraser replied that he was goiug to prove no consideration and fraud. Sir Robert Stout maintained that the question was not relevant. The simple question was whether the defendant signed the promissory note. Mr Fraser persisted that It was a question of no consideration and fraud It wm merely his statement ; but he did not make a statement that be was not prepared to Bupport by evidence. Sir Robert St.ous asked his Worship to say whether it was likely that any possible arrangement that took place before the bill was signed could be relevant. Mr Fraser said he might point out that since his Worship had been upon the bench he had never tiled aoaieofsuch pecuniary importance bb the present one, as it Involved a matter of £15,000 or £20,000. Sir Robert Stout : I was not aware of it. Mr Fraser : You are aware of it, Mr Carew s You almost frighten me.— (Laughter.) Mr Fraser proceeded to say that he was there that day on the authority of Sir Hobert Stout, he having advised that the claims should not be paid. Sir Robert Stout denied that that was so. Mr Fraser said if Sir Robert had not forgotten, he would never have been In court that day. Sir Robert Stout rejoined that Mr Phaser was stating what was absolutely untrue, and it was not the first time he had dono so. Mr Fraser said he would challenge his learned friend to say that he was stating a deliberate untruth.

Sir Robert Stout : So you are. Mr Fraaer would wara his learned friend that probably his command of- vituperative language was greater th»n Sir Kobert's, and his own sulf-commaud was less. He would therefore keep Mtnaelt under control. Sir Robert Stout : Can a man's connection with a Picturesque Alias Company two year.i bifore the bill was signed have any connection with the case ? Mr Carew : It may have. Mr Fraser: It is a question of fraud. It is a fraud from top to bottom. He proceeded to ask the witness what hh connection with the Pioturesque Atlas Company was. Witness replied that he was engaged for them Belling books. He was not a member of the company, whioh was a limited oompany. He could not state how many shareho'do/s there were in the company. He was not a shareholder. Mr Fraßsr : Had you any interest in the company ? Witness : Ido not know what you mean by that question. I had an Interest In Us solvenoy and in its carrying on the business. Mr Fraser : Had you any share in the pecuniary voperations of this company ? Witness replied that he had not. He was a paid aervant of the company, and had no other interest in it at all. He wa9 paid both by salary and on commission. Mr Praser : Did you send down an agent named Metcalf to this colony ?' Witness replied in the affirmative. He did not send Metcalf down here for the Picturesque Atlas Company, but to canvp-ss for himself. When he sent the agent, here his (witness 1 ) connection had ceased with the Picturesque Atlaß Company. To Mr Carew: Witness sent Metcalf down here before the " Atlas " was completed. To Mr Fraser: Metcalf cime here in January 18S8 to cwvivr for Bnwerman Broa. MrFraaor: What iutcrrst.had Bowerman ßros, then in engaging him? You fch-^n had terminated your connfofcioti with the company. Wltneje: Our former connection. Mr Fraser : You formed another connection then ? Witness: Yea Mr Praser: What wa9 your new connection with Witness : We were the New Zealand publishers of "The Picturesque Atla« oi Australasia." He proceeded to say that his firm had exclusive control for selline the work in New Zealand. He engaged Metcalf to push their interests in New Zealand, and provided him with the necessary forms of agreement Sir Robert Stout produced the form of agreement D Mr e Fraser aiked If the Floturejque Atlas Oompany had any direct interest in the works witness' firm fold in this colony? Witness replied that Ms firm bought the book* from the Atlas Company ; they did not manufacture (bern themselves. Hie went round deliver Ing booki

himself, and called at the defendant's house in June 1888. On that ocoaniou he took with him portions of "The Picturesque Atlas of Australasia " The " Atlas " was not completed at that timo. He thought the first number was Issued in the latter part of 1886, or in the beginning of 1837. When he called <t the defendant's house he did not remember how many par! 8 of the " Atlas" were issued, and he did not know how many parts he took with him then. Ne remembered the Interview with the defendant. He tendered him some parts of the •••Atlas" first. He afterwards gave him a bound copy, as he preferred to have a bound copy. He remembered opening the volume that he delivered I containing a picture of Captain Cook. After he showed the defendant the picture of Captain Cook he showed him through the rest of the volume He believed Metcalf was in Hawke'sßay. Metcalf had never been committed for trial to his knowledge, nor yet had he been accused of obtaining money under fahe prerenoes. Mr Fraser: Has he ever been accused of anything? Witneßß: By whom? Mr Fraser : By some person or persons. Did he ever get into trouble at all ? Witness : I decline to answer that question, Mr Carew : Tell him what you refer to. Mr Fraser : I can't. He knowi, and I don't. That is my position in the matter.— (Laughter.) He asked witness if he got a notice from the d -fendant after June 1888. Witness replied that defendant had never addressed an? communication to him so far as he was aware. He hud, however, seeu a notice sent to someone. Mr Fraser produced the following uotioe from Cowan :— " Sandymount, 27th August 1888. "To the Editor of the 'Picturesque Atlas of Australasia.' " Sir, — Some months ago a gentleman calling himself Mr Medcalf or Metcilf came to me and induced me to put my name down for a work he was oanvassing for. which work he most distinctly affirmed was on New Zealand, and similar In design and get-up to the ' Picturesque Atlas of Australasia,' being issued b? the promoters of that work. Some time ago another gentleman came round and delivered at my house a work which he declared was the one for which I had subscribed. This work turns out to be the ' Picturesque Atlas of Australasia,' and not the work for which I signed at all, though at the time of taking delivery I did not notice this. As I have been 'deceived, I hereby Kive you notice that I refuse to take the parts left with me or to receive any more parts of the same work ; also that I demand to be refunded the money paid on the parts delivered. The parts left with me can be had on their being; called for. As lam acting on the best legal advice in sending thi3 notice, I beg you to observe that I wholly repudiate the contract.— l am, &c, " Robt. Cowan." Sir Robert Stout : If he said that I advised him he is stating what is perfectly untrue. Mr Fraser: My friend misunderstood me. I charged him with a lapse of memory in the matter. Sir Robert Stout : There was no lapse of memory in the matter. He proceeded to say that a man came to him, and put certain questions to him in writing, and they were answered In writing. He did not know who they were for. MrFraser asked if witness had seen the notice. Witness replied that he had received it from the AtlAo Company, he thought Mr Fraser : You got a whole Bheaf of these notices — d>d you not ? Witness : No. Mr Fraser: After receiving that notice you sent somebody else round th« Peninsula— did you not ? Witness replied that he seat a man named Oronk to deliver books and collect money. Mr Praser: You could have brought: Mr Metcalf down here— could you not ? Witness replied that he could if he bad thought It necessary. There were only two persons In the firm of Bowerman Brothers. This concluded the oaße for the plaintiff. Mr Fraser, in opening the case for the defence, said the present case w*s one of a series of test cases brought up by Bowerman against settlers on the Peninsula, some nine or ten of whom he represented, but he thought there were altogether some 60 or 70 settlerß down therein the same plight aB the present defendants. Ail these cases were cases of peculiar hardship for this reason : The defendants were almost all simple settlers, who had been, as he should show, deceived in connection with this particular work. Now he submitted in a case of thiß kind— in fact, in all cases brought before the court— he' was well within his rights if, on questions of fact, he asked hiß Worship to draw the same deductions that a jury would draw were they sitting in his place. He had, In short, the right to ask his Worship to take a wide and liberal view of the facts in a ca*e of this kind for this simple reaaou : that he apprehended that the court would be extremely loth to in any way allow itself to be improperly made the means of oppression. And if he could satisfy his Worship that the court was praotically asked to lend its assistance to what was an impudent fraud, he took it that the court would not do bo— that was to say, If he could show any other way out of the difficulty. It was quite possible to imagine a case in which the court had no option. In this case the court had an option, and he wonldask the court to exeroite It. It appeared 'from the statement made by the plaintiff that they were the publishers in this colony for the Atlas Company", they bought from the company and *old ngain to the settlers. He desired as far as possible to avoid using strong language in a case of this kind, beoause it did not help the case, but he assured the court he should be able to prove, "and prove conclusively, that a more barefaced attempt at a swindle than the present case never came before the court. He would willingly acquit Bowerman Bros, of any guilt in the matter if he could, but as they knowingly came in, as he pretumed, and reaped the benefit of their agents' fraud, he must place them in the same category as their agents. He did not know whether his Worship was aware of the modus operandi of these book agents. He, however, had had personal experience of their ways, and in the other colonies they had grown such an evil that they were beginning to legislate with regard to them. He thought Bho it was extremely likely that they would have to adopt some similar legislation in this colony. It was suggested in New South Wales that when theae book agents had a transaction with a person there should be a wltuesß in the neighbourhood, and a witness to any signature. Tn this colony nobody was generally present but the canvasser, who was supposed to be a responsible man, and his victim He had said before that this was really a test case andhe would ask that before hiß Worship gave his decision he should hear the others, as they would enable him to get a thorough grasp of the position and satisfy himself as to the true facts, In the present cases the faots were almost identical. The man Metcalf, who was an advance agent for Bowerraan Bros , came round and told the defendants that he was canvassing for a work that he oiled the " Picturesque Atlas," brought out in Australia. They were told tbat the No. 3 work would , be in 13 or 14 parts ; that it would come out once in three months ; and would cost 5s for each number.

Sir Robert Stout submitted that that was no answer to the present action.

Mr Fraser observed that it was an early stage of the case to argue that. The promissory note arose out of the agreement, Ihe agreement was a fraud, and so was the promissory note. Sir Koberfc Stout : He signed the contract. Mr Fraser : My olient never signed that contract. Praotically he did not know what he signed. He pioceeded to say that after some persuasion Metcalf induced Cowan to subscribe to the New Zealand work Then Mr Cowan was asked to sign two papers. On of these was to all intents and purposes a blank paper, for this reason ; it was the invariable practice of Mr Metoalf to cover up every sorap of writing on it, and presented for signature what was practically a blank sheet That was how the agreement was obtained. Mr Cowan heard no more about the matter until Mr Bowerman went round and delivered the book. He first produced some parts of what Mr Oowan took to be a " Picturesque Atlas of New Zealand." Mrs Cowan said that before all the numbers were delivered the others would be in rags and not wor'h binding. Mr Bowerman then said he had got a bound copy and would takft part payment tor itand ajiromiitory note for the balance. He opened the book and showed Captain Cook's likeness j then shut itup»gain. In the meantime Mr Cowan had gone out He was called back to sign a promissory note. He afterwards discovered thac he had been tricked— that the work he had been nupplied with waa not the work he had agreed to take. That case was not a singular one. A public, meeting was held at the Peninsula to consider the matter, and it waa resolved to obtain counsel's opinion on the situatiou through Mr Duthie, and counsel advised Sir Robert Stout : You are stating what you have no right to state. Mr Fra?er went on to say that the next step Mr Cowan took was to send notice to the Atlas Company - he did not know Bowerman Brothers in connection with the matter— stating how be had heen deceived. The next stage was that Mr Oronk came round, and be wm told by Mr Oowan how he had been deceived, nnd Mr Oronk did. not sera to leave wy pore copies

in the district. The next thing was that Mr Cowan was summoned to appear at that court for the a siount of a promissory note. Now he (counsel) would submit that as a matter of law Messrs Bowerman Bros, were responsible for the fraud of any of their agents as they had taken the benefit of the contract. He proceeded to oite a number of cases bearing on the present one, and then called evidence for the defence.

Robert Oowan, dairy farmer, residing at the Peninsula, Btated that he remembered Metcalf. He came to his house in April 1888. and told him he was employed by n company to get some subscribers for a work that was to be brought out. Mr Fraser : Did he say what the work was ?

Witness replied that he said it was to be a New Zealand Picturesque Atlas, and the price would be 5s a number. Witness asked bow many numbers there would be, and Metoalf replied 12 "or 14. Witneis said, after some conversation with Metoalf, that he would sign for the Atlas on the condition that the statements were fulfilled for the New Zealand work. Mr Oarew : Did he submit to you any of her work ? Witneiß ; He spoke about no other work to me. Mr Carew : How came you to say that you would sign for a New Zealand work if he had only spoken about a New Zealand work ?

Witness : He spoke about no other work than a New Zealand work to me at that time. He showed me a copy of an Australian work after the conversation.

Mr Fraser : What did he say about that ? Witness: I looked at it, anrt I said I had no interest whatever in the Australian work. Ho said he merely carried the copy of that work to show what like the New Zealand work would be when it came out. He had a book with the subscribers' names in it of the New Zealand work. Mr Fraser : What sort of book was that ? Witness ; Something like a copybook.

Mr Fraser : Did you sign that r Witness : I signed that, and just as I was done signing it he showed me a small book like a chequebook, so far as I remember, and by the time I had one signed he put the other before me and said, "Please sign this too." He showed me a blank leaf. He had his hand upon the book. There was no writing or print on it that I could see. Mr Oarew : I suppose if there had been print upon It you would have seen it ? Witness : Yes ; I would have seen it. If there was print it was concenled from my view. I could see nothing but a blank leaf. Mr Fra«er asked witness if he signed the agreement which he produoed. Witness: No, I never saw that. Mr Oarew : Can you say if that is your Writing ? Witness : That is my signature. Mr Oarew : Is that what you call a blank leaf r Witness: Yes. Mr Carew s Was there any print there ? Witness : If there was it wrs concealed from my view. I saw no conditions whatever. Mr Fraeer : You b\w no print at all ? Witness : Neither print or writing. Mr Fraser aaked his Worship if he had ever seen an Indelible ink pencil-

Mr Carew replied in the negative. Mr Fraser observed if he had such a pencil he could produce half a dozen copies of one signature. Sir Robert Stout: You had better say nothing about that Mr Oarew fto witneßß): Do you mean to say that you signed the bottom of a blank sheet of paper? Witness : I say so. There was nothing but a blank leaf th it I could ree.

Mr Frasert Are you sure that you signed it in ink?

Witness : I think so, but lam not positive. It 1b bo long since that it may have escaped my memory. Mr Fraser asked if Sir Robert Stout had a list of subscribers. Sir Robert Stout produced a list, and stated that the witness signed one Hke it. Mr Fraser said be wanted to get an indelible ink pencil, so that the witness oould sign his name with it. Mr Oarew asked the witness if ha signed two documents with the samo ink or pencil ? Witnesa replied that ha thought bo. Whatever he signed the one document with he signed the other. Mr Oarew said he was perfectly satisfied that the witness meant that he signed the writing on the document produced. Mr>Fraser : That he wrote it there ? Mr Carew : That is what he meant. Mr Fraser { It is possible to take two or three copies from an indelible ink pencil. Witness : If I signed it with ink it was blaok ink if with his pencil, then that is my writing. The court then adjourned till 2 o'clock.

On resuming after the lunoheon adjournment, witness, examined by Mr Fraser. said he had seen Mr Bowerman before that day ; he thought it was on the 30th June 1888. At that date Bowerman came to witness' house, but did not tell bis name,. He showed witness a paper, on whioh there was a signature, and asked him if it was his. He replied that it was, and Bowerman then gave him a book, and afterwards said that next time witness would have to take three numbers to bring him up to the publication. Witness' wife remarked that by the time all the 12 quarterly parts of the book were out they would ba bo well used that they would not be worth binding. Mr Bowerman then pulled out a bound volume and said he would leave it. Mrs Cowan said she had not the money for it then, and Bowerman replied that he did not want the money. He said that if they took that volume it would be 15s oheaper to them In the end. Witness then went out to milk the oows, but had not been out more than two or three minutes when his wife called him baok, saving that Bowerman hsd not done with him yet. Witnesß went into the house, and Bowerman opened the book and showed him a pioture of Captain Cook. He did not go through the baok and show several pictures, but only the one page with the picture. Afterwards Bowerman gave witnesj a promissory note for £3 to sign, the remaining 30s making up the prion of the book having been paid by witness' wife. (Promissory note produced, and witness identified his signature.) Witness signed the note and Bowerman then went away. Witness finished his work at the byre, and when he came back to the house he looked at the volume, and was surprised to find that it was not the work he had agreed to take at aU, and «ne that had never been offered to him, but an Australian work. He told his wife to lay it by as it was the wrong book. He tried to iind Bowerman, but could not, and he afterwards learned that there were- a great number of subscribers in tho same pos'tion as himself. They agreed to hold a meeting, and Mr Duthie, the obairman, was authorised to consult Sir Robert Stout.

Sir Robeit Stout Baid he knew nothing about the matter. Mr Carew : Who paid the costs P Witness {replied that the meeting subscribed the costs.

Sir Robert Stout : I have never received one penny of the money. After another passage at arms between Sir Robert Stout and Mr Fraser,

Witness went on to say that he sent a letter to the oompany. Ho believed others on the Peninsula sent similar letters. An old man — witness did not know his name - afterwards came round on behalf of the company, stating that he was authorised by the company to call on the subscribers to see if they would continue taking the books, and also to take any money if they would glvo it to him. Witness told the man that If the company gave him the proper work and took baok the Australian book he would continue to be a subscriber to the New Zealand work, but if not he would act on the legal advice that had been obtained. The next feature was that witness got a summons from Bowerman Bros.

By 81r Robert Stout : Shortly after witness signed the promissory note he received a letter from the firm telling him when the note wa» due and informing htm of the bank into whioh it was to be paid. Witness never went to the bank for the address of the firm. The bound volume witness received was similar to the one produced, and it was lying on the table, but witness did not see that on the cover was printed "Picturesque Atlas of Australasia." He saw Cook's piot-ure, but did not see that on th« opposite leaf was written " Atlas of Australasia." Bowerman did not show him two mans— one of Niw SouHi Wales and one of Victo'la; he saw Captain Cook and that was all. That surae night he discovered that a mistake had been made, but he did not inquire at once for Bowerman. It was not till close on two months afterwards that he began his inquiries by writing the letter previously mentioned to the company. He did not usually sign a thing without knowing what it wai, but in this cas« he thounht it was a blank sheet of paper on which he was putting his name, and that Bowerman had a reason of his own for wishing the signature. When witness spoke to Metcalf he saw a book, and in it waß a picture of Captain Cook, and in the bound volume he got from Bowerman there was also a similar pioture. witne's did not believe that the book he had agreed to take from Metoalf was the same as he got from Bowerman, although the same picture was In both of them, and both had the same name on the outside. He did not understand tbat the " Pioturesque Atlas of AuatralMla " dealt with Hew Zealand ai well as Amtrails

Mr* Oowan also gave evidence. W. O. Duthie was next called. Sir Robert Stout mentioned that his clerk had informed him that the sum of 10s 6d had been paid Into his office on account of certain queries he hnd advised upon. Mr Duthie : Thank you, Sir Robert. In answer to Mr Fraser, witness said he was postmaster at Highcliff when a large number of notices were sent out. He oould not say who Beit them out. He was ohairman of the publio meeting, and he afterwards consulted a solicitor on the matter and acted on his advice. Witness, in answer to Sir Robert Stout, said he put certain questions to him (Sir R. Stout) to answer, but he did not mention the name of Mr Cowan or anyone elie in the matter. He simply sttted that a number of subscribers bad held a meeting, and considering they had been grievously taken in in the matter, they wanted to Know what position they were in.

Sir Robert Stout, in addressing the court, said that no one would dispute the law on the question. If a misrepresentation was made there were two remedies open : the contract might bo rescinded if it had not been performed, or the person might sue for damages. In a oase where fraud was charged, the onus of proof, of course, lay on the person who made the charge, and the strongest kind of evideuoe wa» requisite to support it. He would just draw his Worship's attention to the fact that his friend pledged himself to show the relevancy of asking questions of the relationship between Bowermau and 00. and another firm more than two years ago, and as yet his evidence on that point was not forthcoming. Ab far as fraud was concerned, the charge was ridioulous and absurd. Hlb Worship reserved judgment in the oase. BOWBRMAN V. WM 808 ZRI SON, JVX.

Olalm, £3 10s on a promissory note. Sir Robert Stout appeared for plaintiffs, and Mr Fra3er for defendant, who resideß on the Peninsula. J. P. Bowerman, one of the plaintiffs, said that defendant signed a promissory note in favour of witness' firm that had not yet been paid. By Mr Fraser . After that transaction witness saw defendant in Princes street, Dunedin Ho wanted witness to take back the " Atlas of Australasia " and give him another volume In which the subject of Kew Zealand was treated. Witness declined to do anything of the kind. He did not tdl witness he had been tahen In by a man n*med Metcalf. Witness w»a not aware that at this time their agent, Metoalf, had been selling a work on New Zsalandand not on Australia. Three or four days after defendant signed the note, Donaldson, of the Peninsula, did not, as far as witness remembered, come after him and tell him that defendant wanted to see him. Witness got his promissory note afterwards, and it was dishonoured, being returned from the bank marked " Signature irregular." Witness had never been in the courts of New South Wales in cases similar to this one. He had no connection with a man named Keirle, of the A.M P. Buildings, Dunedin, and had never heard of him

To Sir Robert Stout: Defendant paid £l cash for the bound volume, for whioh, witness thought, he got arcelpt. This olospd plaintiffs' case. William Robertson, examined by Mr Fraser, said that a gentleman travelling for the " Ploturesque Atlas" Oompany of Australasia called at his house some time ngo, saying that sinoH they had heard that Sir Julius Vogel bad failed toget out a book of this klu<i they had decided to take up the work, as they could do it muoh cheaper than anyone else, as they had plant, machinery, and artists in Australia, besides which they knew the plaoe, and that the subscribers here could have it at a cheaper rate than Sir Juliuß Vogel's oompany could sell theirs. The agent exhibited specimens of what the workmanship would be. and went on to say that It would do good to New Zealand as the " Picturesque Atlas "had done good to Australia by inducing capital to flow into It from Home, so that it was now in the height of prosperity. Witness agreed to beoome a subscriber, thinking that suoh a book might do gond to New Zealand. The agent said the book would be brought out in quarterly numbers at 5b each, and that the probable cost of the lot would be £2 10s or £3. He then pulled out a book and askfld witness to sign his name on a leaf, the greater part of which he (the agent) covered, leaving only sufficient room f«r the signature. He showed views of Duuedin—Burns' monument, Knox Ohuroh, the University, and other places, saying they would all bo in the Atlas, and there were also some views of Ghrlst-ohur'-h shown. Witness thought he said that Captain Oook's wonld be the first pioture in the New Zealand work. After witness signed the first form, on which he believed there was some printing, the agent said there wa» another paper he wished witness to sign, as he was going to send It to the publishers to let them see how they were getting on with the sale of the work, and the other signed paper they would keep themselves. The second piece of paper witness signed waa also partially covered. A general conversation between the agent and witness followed, but *.he former never once mentioned that he wanted to sell the " Picturesque Atlas »f Australatia "•. he said it dealt with New Zealand. About four or five months afterwards Mr Bowerman called on witness, saying he had brought the " Pioturesque Atlas," to whioh witness had subscribed. He showed him a paper, but held it in such a way that witness oould only see one part of it, asking "Is tha f your signature P " Witness replied that he thought itwas. He remarked that the work was out sooner than he expected, and Bowerroan said that the plant and everything was in order, and they had got on very well and quicker than they thought at first they would He gave witness four parts, and when witness said that by the time he had all the parts many of them might be badly used, Bowerman said he might nave a bound copy at once, and pulled it out, saying he would get it 15s less than if he took the parts. Witness took the bound volume. He had not brought it in with him. It was not like the one produced, inasmuch as there was no name on the cover. When Bowerman showed witness the book he opened It at the pioture of Captain Cook, and then ran smartly over the leaves, but never stopping at any one psge. He wanted witness to pay another pound on the work, but witness would not and he then wanted him to pay 10s more, but witness had made up his mind that he would not do 8% and signed a promissory note for £3 10s. Bowerman then left, and th«> next morning witness looked at the book and found it was the wrong one. He sent a message to Donaldson, with whom Bowerman was staying, that he (witness) wished to see him. It was not Mil a few days afterwards that he mot Bowerman in Dnnedin, when he asked him about the matter, and said ho would take the New Zealand work, but not the Australian one. Bowerman did not seem disposed to speak about the matter, and when witness called to a friend to be a witness to Bowerman's refusal to take hack the work he moved away and would not speak to him. Witness afterwards spoke to him alone. Bowerman then toW witness he had given a promissory note and that he would be liable for it. Witness did not know a oanvasser named Cronk, and the next he knew of the ranttor was when he got a summons to attend the court about the promissory note. By Bir Robert Stout : When witness gave the promissory note he did not complain of the book dealing onlr with Australia. The book was lying on the table, but not in suoh a way tbat witness could seb the name on it. If Bowerraan said that when wltneßS took the book heremarked that it was Australia, witness would deny that, and would also deny that Bowerman said there was another book dealing with New Zealand. His reason for asking for one dealing with New Zealand was that Metcalf had told him there was suoh a book coming out. Thomas Robertson was the next witness called. He said that he was not related to the defendant. He was in the room when Bowerman gave defendant a book, and the latter remarked that ho did not want to have anything to do with It. as Australia did not Interest him. Defendant asked if he would have to pay for any more numbers that came out, and Bowerman said, " No. that closes the bargain." By Sir Robert Stout : Witness was sitting by the fire all the time Bowerman was in. Bowerman showed the picture of Captain Cook to defendant, but it was not fcms that he ran over the other leaves | in Ilia book; he simply showed the pictures, then laid the bonk down.

William Donaldson g*ve evidence as to being requested to send flowermfin to call at defendant's house He told Bowerman, but the iattet did not say he would go. J. P. Bowerman, recalled by Sir Robert Stout, said that when he got the promissory note for defendant he showed him every page In the book. It was his Invariable custom to do so. Witness told him positively that the book dealt with Australia, and defendant understood exactly what was meant.

At thi* stage the further hearing of the case was adjourned till Friday.

A movement is on foot at Wellington to establish a Civil ', Service Association, on the same lines as the Melbourne Association, the !«inoipalobjeot being to force on a bill providing oc the olwoiflottioa of servant*,