SALE OF SHARES.

Otago Witness, Issue 3006, 25 October 1911, Page 63

SALE OF SHARES.

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS. WELLINGTON, October 12. A civil action arising out of* the purchase of gold mining shares was heard in the Magistrate's Court before Dr M'Arthur, S.M., to-day. Fred C. Hjorring, sharebroker, Wellington, claimed the sum of £4l 13s 4d as damages from J. Bridson, storekeeper, Coromandcl. Plaintiff alleged that during April, 1911, acting under instructions from defendant, he purchased for defendant 2000 shares in the Kapanga Gold Mining Company (Ltd.) at the price of 9d per share. The shares were duly tendered to defendant by plaintiff, but the former refused to take or pay for them. Subsequently plaintiff was called on to pay a call of 2d per share on the shares, and eventually he disposed of them at the price of 6d per share. Plaintiff therefore claimed £4l 13s 4d as indemnity for loss. Mr P. W. Jackson, who appeared for defendant, applied for a nonsuit on the ground that the provisions of section 133 of the Stamp Duty Act had not been complied with. He pointed out that plaintiff bad neglected to stamp the contract note and forward it to defendant within 24 hours as required by the act. He also contended that on the' merits of the case defendant had a good defence. Defendant's story was that in April he wired plaintiff to purchase 2000 Kapanga shares at a maximum of 9d. Plaintiff replied that the shares were selling at 10£d, Subsequently he saw in an Auckland paper that the rhares were selling at 7d, and he again wired plaintiff to act on the previous instructions. Plaintiff replied that h,o had bought at 9d, but when plaintiff's draft arrived he (defendant) refused to honour it, as he had noticed that on the date on which plaintiff purchased the shares Kapanga shares Avere selling in Coromandel at 7d. After seme correspondence had passed, plaintiff agreed to accept 8d for the shares. Plaintiff, in his evidence, said that he had agreed to take 8d in order to have the matter settled; it was not because he was overcharging defendant. Defendant, however, absolutely refused to pay the call of 2d on the shares, and no de? resulted. He stated that he was qu.it\ willing to pay 8d per share if plaintiff would treat the matter as a new contract. Mr E. J. Fitzgibbon, who appeared for plaintiff, said there was no evidence before the court that Ka.pangas were selling in Coromandel at 7d. The notice appealing in the paper was not proof that were taking place at that price. Regarding the nonsuit point, counsel contended that as Mr Hjorring was acting for Mr Bridson, the latter could not rely for a defence upon any technical mistake madjj by Mr Hjorring. Judgment was reserved.