SUPREME COURT.

Timaru Herald, Volume XCIV, Issue 14360, 4 February 1911, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

sittings in ti.m.uiu third dav. Tho Supreme Court continued its sittings in Timaru yesterday, when a civil case was heard bel'oro His Honour Air Justice Denniston. CLAIM l'Uli, DAMACKS. G. S. -Meredith and Co. (Mr lCinncrncy, with him Air Perry), claimed £iod damages from J. Hunt junr. (Air b. Ci. Raymond), ior illegal seizure of a traction cugiue. The caso was heard before a jury consisting of Jlessrs W. A.' Cooper (foreman), J. Stevenson, J. Acheson, and W. H. Budd. Mr Perry stated that plaitifl's earned on the business of eliaff-eutting, straw-hauling, and haulage. On .May Ist last they entered into an agreement with Air John Hunt senr., fur the hirepurchase of a traction engine, for wlr.eh they paid £2O, and were to pay £4 every 14 days. After 90 payments the engine was to become theirs. On May Ist they took possession of the engine, made the stipulated payments and had undisturbed possession of tho engine till September 2(jtli. Between thoso dates defendant, :i son of Mr John Hunt senr., worked on tho engine occasionally, and was well aware of the agreement. Air Raymond said the question before tho jury was the assessment of damages only. His Honour said Hint seemed to be the position—the liability of the defendant was admitted. Re did not think that Mr Perry should go in to all tho circumstances as if ho wanted vindictive- damages. Mr Perry said he wished the- jury t--, know the ciroumstanco3 under which, the seizure was made.

Mr Raymond again objected. The question was one merely of assessment of damages, and these were limited in the absence of anv claim fc.r special damages. Defendant admitted that he had mi right to take ilte engine. Some argument ensued on the point, Mr Raymond's objection being noted.

. Mr Perry proceeded to m't-ition to the jury several ways in which tho defendant's action had entailed loss on plaintiff?. Mr Raymond again objecting to those details. Mr Perry then called evidence to show that plaitilfs were entitled to .-übstautial damages. All witnesses were ordered out of Court.

George Meredith, the plaintiff, gave evidence on the lines of counsel's address. He' had performed his part of the agreement with Mr Hunt senr. Defendant removed the engine in September, and it was returned after tho present action was e-oninicuccd. Men bad been engaged to work on tho engine, and had to bo dismissed, after being kept waiting for a while. Both were paid a- certain amount. Witness obtained another engine, but it would not do the work.

Examined by Mr Raymond witness said that defendant brought the engine ba-ck to him, on November ISth, but he (witness) did not take possession till December 7th, in order to consult- bis solicitor in the meantime.

S. J. Hitchens, one of the plaintiffs. said that- when defendant removed the engine, witness warned him that ho would be liable to heavy damages. He gave particulars of the losses sustained by plaintiffs through the engine being removed. Mr Raymond, before calling evidence, said that defendant did not claim any right to the engine. He had taken it peaceably enough, and admitted that he was in the wrong. The only question was the assessment of damages. The evidence would be brief, and would prove that the engine was unfit for any but agricultural work, and was not at all fit for haulage, which Air Meredith had stated_ that he had wanted it for. Secondly,' he would show that eliaff-eutting work was over by the end of September, therefore plaintiffs had suffered no loss at all. The engine was taken in tho slack season, and any number of engines could have been hired. if Mr Aleredith really wanted one. AV. J. Wells, engineer, aud D. Campbell certificated driver, testified that the engine was 16 years old, of 6-horse | power, and. too slow a traveller for haulage work. The latter said the engine cost £6OO when new. 1 H. Hunt, brother of defendant, said the engine could only go 2\ miles nn hour with a load. The defendant and W. J. Black, contractor, corroborated the foregoing evidence. Air Black'' Eaid the engine was ton light for haulage, and would never haul a truck of grain between Pareora and Tima.ru. Plaintiff, recalled, stated that the two previous chaff-cutting seasons lasted till December 7th, ad there was straw-pressing to be done after that. There was some difference as to the cost of hiring an engine. Plaintiff said engine aud driver would cost £2 a day; a witness re:alltd by Air iliaymond said the regular rate for an engine was £1 a day.

Air Raymond asked. His Honour to direct the jury that damages were onlyrecoverable up to the time of the issue of the writ; that interest on the value of the property furnished the measure o- general damages; and that loss of profits through the engine not being available for contracts was too remote, defendant having no notice of such contracts, and in the case of Wainono the contract was not entered into until after the seizure.

Mr Raymond, addressing the jury, said that the issue was a very simple one. With a belief of right, Mr Hunt junr., took possession of the engine,— had taken possession wrongly inlaw—and the simple question was, What amount of damages is plaintiff entitled to recover? He submitted that the claim was an utterly preposterous, ridiculous and an outrageous one, and tltat plaintiff would have had n) work for the traction engine during the period when it was in the possession of Hunt. Therefore hj? had practically suffered no less, and should be allowed only the interest on the value of the engine. Blr Kiimeniey submitted that plaintiffs had made a reasonable claim,' and

■Ui-t defendant had a/.-tod in qutc iiMi-ea--.-m.lih' manner. The- machine „;,, worth 1-:UUI to plaintiff, for though !,. h..d paid .C'2'lo for it, many improvements had br-en carried out on it -('..ue-cl discussed the evidence

At ;>.':«) p.m. the Court adjourned till 10.30 a.m. to-day. IN CHAAfIitiRS.

I'robato was granted in the following estates: Kliza AleLaehhm, of Waimato (ill- W. -M. Hamilton;; John Douglas Soobie (Air J. Hay;; John Gibson (Air Walter Shaw); Win. Suell (Air W. G. Aspiuall); Gcorgo Al. Smith (Air J. H. Buchanan); K Thomas Jones (Mr Walter Shaw); Jane Sattorthwaito (Messrs Tripp and Roileston); Michael Clifford (Mr K. G. Cripps); George Munro (Mr A. C. Aliddleteji); Win. Grant (Messrs Tripp and Roileston); and Wm. Boyd (Alessrs Smithson and Raymond).

Letters of administration were granted in tho estates of Alary McGregor (Messrs Perry, Perry, and Kinnerney), and Samuel Cameron (Messrs Perry, Perry and ICuinorncy).