MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Southland Times, Issue 16786, 14 July 1911, Page 2

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

THURSDAY, JULY 13. (Before Mr G. Crulckshank, S.M.) UNDEFENDED CASES. Judgment was given for plaintiffs by default in the following cases: P. H. Vickery v. Jas. Deegan. jun. (Oreti), for £9 odd and costs £1 2s; T, Holmes v. Peter C'raies for 20s with 6s costs; Whlttingham and Co. v. R. Quinn for os, costs ss; G. W. Bennett and Co. v. E. A. Phillips for £29 12s lOd, with costs £2 14s. AN ASSAULT AFTERMATH. L. M. Buddie and W. H. Mustoe sued William Forde for £3 on a dishonoured promissory note. Mr Stout had lodged notice of defence, but Intimated that his client had not got to town. Mr Haggitt who appeared for plaintiffs, said that the case arose out of an assault committed by Forde on the plaintiffs last St. Patrick’s Day In the vicinity of the Empire Hotel. His clients had claimed compensation, and a promissory note was given by Forde for £3 payable one month after that date. The note had not been honoured. He asked for judgment. L. M, Buddie said that he was struck by Fordo and had a tooth knocked out and several others loosened. Witness threatened to claim £lO as compensation, and Forde then handed him the promissory note for £3, one pound of which was to go to Mustoe, who also had been assaulted. William Henry Mustoe said that he had remonstrated with Forde, and had been knocked down. He had rung up the police Immediately after the occurrence. His Worship deckled to look into the matter. The promissory note had evidently been given on the understanding that no police proceedings would be taken. Plaintiffs really had brought both a civil and a criminal action against Forde. A COMMISSION CASE. John Altken (Ottttara) sued Alfred William Gosling, formerly a farmer at Greenhllls for £l7 10s, being amount of commission respecting the sale of defendant’s property at Greenhills to one Thomas Park. Mr R. H. Rattray appeared for Altken, and Mr A. B. Haggitt for Gosling. Mr Rattray said that plaintiff had formerly been a farmer and had since been, among other things, a commission agent. Through Altken’s instrumentality a farm belonging to Gosling was sold to Park, and his client claimed commission on £4 50, which was the price at which the property had been placed in his hands for sale. John Aitken, the plaintiff, said that Gosling had offered to sell him the place but he (plaintiff) said the farm was too small for his purposes, but’ that he thought he could dispose of it. Gosling replied that if Altken did sell the farm the commission would be as good to him as to anyone else. A prospective buyer turned up in the person of a Mr Park, who was shown over the farm by plaintiff. Some 'lime afterwards he found out that Park bad bought the place from Gosling through another agent. The price at which lie was given instructions to sell was £450, and lie now claimed commission on that amount. Besides farming lie carried on a business as general commission agent. To Mr Haggitt Nobody was backing him up in this case. No arrangement had been made with three men whereby lie would not have to pay costs of the case if it went against him. He had known Mr Park for some time, and also knew that Gosling’s place had been in the hands of various agents for sale. Park bad told him after inspecting the property that lie could not find the money Just then. Then witness told Park that he had another property at Mokotua which would suit,him. He did not consider that that proved or suggested that the business between him and Park regarding Gosling’s property was off. Wm. Silk, farmer, of Greenhills, said that Aitken had brought Park down to see Gosling’s farm, and had taken him over the place in his presence. Mr Haggitt held that Altken could not claim commission. The property had been in the hands of agents. Several had failed to dispose of it, and Mr Altken had failed also, as lie had shown Park a second property. Alfred William Gosling, the defendant, said that he had come to know Altken through an Introduction from a land agent who had described Altken as a buyer of his farm. Aitken would not buy bis farm as be said it was too small for him. The property had been placed in the bands of Messrs W. Todd and Co.. W. B. Scandrett, J. Holloway, and the Finance Co. It had been well advertised. On a certain Sunday Mr Aitken brought down Mr Park with the object of showing him the farm With a view to sale. He told Mr Aitken that whoever sold the farm would be entitled to commission. Later on Park wrote to witness to say that lie could not raise the money, and therefore could not buy tiie place. Some time afterwards Park bought the place through W. B. Scandrett who got the commission and assisted Park in the purchase. To Mr Rattray Scandrett got to know of Park through witness. Thomas Park, market gardener at Greenhills, said that ho had been told of the place at Greenhills by Aitken with whom he inspected the property. After this visit he informed Aitken that he liked the place, and that lie would try to get assistance with the finance. He could not get the backing, and Informed Aitken accordingly. Then Aitken said that he had another place at Mokotua which would suit him. Shortly after lie saw Mr Scandrett and bought Gosling’s place through that agency. Witness bad a conversation with Altken List week, when the latter said that he wasn’t really bringing on the case, but that Silk and two others had urged the action. Gordon Fredrick Scandrett. of the firm of W. B. Scandrett. land agents, said that Gosling’s property had been placed In Ills father’s hands for sale in March. After a time Gosling approached witness, and said that Park would buy the place if he had the money. Shortly after that the deposit was forthcoming, and Park became the purchaser at £450. Mr Haggitt submitted that the mere Introduction of a party who became a subsequent purchaser, did not entitle the introducer to commission, when a sale was effected through an Independent agent, especially as there was no special contract In the matter of the introduction. He quoted at length from decisions bearing on similar cases. Mr Rattray held that ids client must succeed. Had It not been for Altken’s efforts the property would not yet have been sold. Aitken was Instrumental In disposing of the property apart from any other who might have completed the business. He also quoted authorities. His Worship reserved his decision.