WYNDHAM COURT

Southland Times, Issue 19254, 27 May 1924, Page 9

WYNDHAM COURT

YESTERDAY’S CASES. ; A sitting of the Magistrate’s Court was conducted by Mr G. Cruickshank, S.M., at Wyndham yesterday, when the following cases were heard: A BULL DISPUTE. John Peter McLellan and Carswell and Co. (Mr Davey) claimed £2O from Alexander Cameron (Mr Eric Russell) the price of a bull sold to defendant in November. In outlining his case Mr Davey said the dispute had arisen over the sale of an Ayrshire bull, which Cameron bought. Cameron asked if the bull were a “fencer.” McLellan could not guarantee this, but referred to a previous owner who stated the bull was not a fencer, although it tossed gates. In evidence John P. McLellan, farmer, said he owned the bull in question which was a pure bred. The bull was bought from Hugh Marshall, John Mitchell owning the bull previously. . The bull was only in witness’s possession a week when Malcolm brought Cameron along and all three inspected the bull. Cameron asked if the bull were a fencer and witness replied that so far as he was aware the bull was not a fencer. Witness said he would ring Mitchell up and ask him, Cameron saying that that would be all right. Mitchell reported that the bull would to&s gates, but did not bother fences. Witness took the bull down to Cameron on Monday morning, and told defendant about the tossing. Cameron said that it would not matter as there were only two wooden gates on the farm. Witness told Cameron that the bull tossed gates and that he could take the bull or leave him. Cameron then took possession of the bull. About a week after Cameron approached him and said he was ringing witness up to take the bull away. Witness replied to Cameron that he could not do that as he had taken possession. To Mr Russell: Cameron never said he would not have a bull on the farm that was a fencer. The sale was not made subject to a guarantee that the bull was not a fenebr. The sale note was signed oy witness and Cameron and when he got the money from Carswell he gave a receipt for the money. He understood the receipt was in full payment for the bull. lan Malcolm, agent for Carswell and Co., said he Introduced the parties. Cameron, after inspecting the bull, seemed satisfied and agreed to purchase at £2O. The pedigree was mentioned and McLellan agreed to get it. With regard to fencing McLellan said so far as he knew the bull was not a fencer, but he said he would ask Mitchell, a previous owner. The original sale note did not mention fencing. Cameron approached witness at Wyndham, witness informing Cameron that he would have to see McLellan. His firm advanced McLellan the price of the bulL To Mr Russell: His firm advanced the money for the bull, deducting a small account at the same time. Witness did not hear Cameron state he would not take the bull if it were a fencer. John Mitchell, Woodville, farmer, said he owned the bull previously and the bull gave him no trouble except that he broke a few gates. Mr Russell said his client had said he would not have the bull on the place if it were a fencer. McLellan was frank, and would not guarantee the bull was not a fencer until further information was received. The bull was delivered and guaranteed not to be a fencer. He did not suggest that wilful misrepresentation was made but innocent misrepresentation had taken place. He contended that Carswell and Co. had no standing in the case as they were only commission agents, while he held a letter from Mr Davey which stated that McLellan had been paid for the bull. Alexander Cameron, defendant, farmer, Mataura Island, said he stated clearly that he did not want a bull that was a fencer on any account. When he inspected the bull he was satisfied with him and asked whether he was a fencer. McLellan agreed to make inquiries about being) a fencer, and when the bull was delivered McLellan said the bull was not a fencer although he tossed gates. Next morning the bull was over in a neighbour’s having gone through a six-barb fence. Witness had to purchase another bull. On Friday after the sale he told McLellan that the bull was a fencer and was no good to witness. He also saw Malcolm and complained that the bull was not up to the guarantee, and Malcolm replied that it was all right as they would not out any money until they heard again from witness. He had never used McLellan’s bull, and had bought another through Carswell and Co. He sent a registered letter to McLellan stating he would not take the bull. He still held the bull, and had always been willing to return it. To Mr Davey: He did not want a fencer on any account. He signed the sale note without any mention of fencer in it as McLellan did not know if the bull were a fencer. The gate tossing did not worry him. He denied that McLellan said he could take the bull or leave it when delivery was made. Re-examined he stated that he signed the sale note in the paddock. The sale note was not drawn up at his dictation. In delivering judgment His Worship said the defence had failed as it had not produced sufficient proof. He gave judgment for McLellan for £2O, costs £2 10s. STAMP DUTY. G. Haldane, who did not appear, admitted issuing a receipt of over £2 without stamping same and was fined 10s, costs 7s. Sydney Goodlett (Mr Davey) pleaded guilty to a similar offence. Mr Davey said that Goodlet had been fined for a similar offence, which occurred about the same time. Fined 10s, costs 7s. VARIOUS. Catherine Brom was fined 10s, costs 7s, for allowing cattle to wander in the Edendale township. Patrick Farrington was fined ss, costs 17s 6d, for allowing a horse to wander at Edendale. Ellis Nutsford on a similar charge was fined 17s 6d (costs).