Depended Cases.

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2140, 12 November 1875, Page 2

Depended Cases.

SALMON AND WOODWABD V. C. "WILSON.

This was a claim of '"£47 10s money paid.

Mr Macdonald for plaintiffs ; Mr Tyler for defendant.

Charles Wilson, defendant, said he was a miner living* at the; Thames. Knew plaintiffs. Had dealt very little in the sharemarket, but had a small transaction in Unicorns in connection with Mr Salmon in 1872. Witness was told there were 50 bought in the first transaction. Made money out of that—between £6 and £7. The price was from 6s to 8s 6d. Believed the price when the 50 were bought was 3s ; didn't know the number or the price only from Mr Salmon's telling him. Witness was working manager of the mine at the time. The next transaction Mr Salmon said he had purchased 100 shares. Met him one morning about 7 oclock at the Governor Bpwen Hotel. Witness went there to see him, and told him Unicorns were looking up and to go and buy some. There was an agreement between them to buy and sell and divide the profits. About dinner time witness saw Mr Salmon, and he said he had bought 100 share at Bs. Nevtr authorised

him to buy shares for witness; all the shares were to be between them. Did not hear anything more of the shares for some About five or six months ago Mr .Salmon offered witness a bill. He had heard of calls being made. Never had'a sale note or a bill until the tinia mentioned, a. few monthipj||o.; jDidn'^; recollect having any conVefiaitfon with, Mr Woodward about thpse shares," or about:the calls beings^id; ok' the shares. Had no •recollection of telling Mr Woodward they should not lose any money by him. Had said to Mr Salmon ho (witness) would pay his' half. Since receiving^the bill^fcad..agreed to pay his half, when told by Mr Salmon that he would sue. The profit on witness' half of the 50. shares ; : was ;: paid, by Mr Woodward, There was a mistake of 10s, and Mr Woodward*^d him next day, or about that. Kne^llW Woodward was a partner of Salmon's. • '

Examined by Mr Tyler.—When first witness knew anything of Mr Salmon, he (witness) was manager of the New Caledonia, in which he had a large interest and no money to pay the calls. Witness then took charge of the Unicorn, and Salmon said, "Now Wilson, if there is any show let me know, "and I will buy some shares and we will'divide the profits." When the mine began to look up, witness told Salmon, and he bought the shares at described., He. r did not ..authorise the purchase of y sKarjp in, his name: He had never been asked for'paymenfcof the 100 shares, nor for calls thereon. He had no sale^note or transfer. He had never been asked for calls or for payment until about seven months ago, nor did he ask eitherof'the plaintiffs to pay calls on his account/ He had said as he divided the profits on the first transaction he was willing to share the loss on the last. He never admitted the liability now claimed in any way. Had been sued for. this before, but by Mr Salmon alone. ■,i '%"T "' ]-, ' ■ % Be-examined "by Mr Macdohald—-That action was withdrawn. When he received his share of the profit he did not care to sign the block' of the book, because he didn't want his name to appear, being manager of the company. John Henry Salmon, sworn, deposed— That in 1872 he was carrying* on business with Mr Woodward as sharebrokers as Salmon and Co. Had paid Mr Wilson the whole profit on the 50 shares referred to, deducting a call on some of the parcel. The market price was "at that time from 5s 6d to 8s 6d. The amount of profit on the 50 could not have amounted to more than that paid to Wilson. Had heard with surprise of the agreement said to have been entered into. Mr Wilson had no money, and he (witness) had agreed to buy /or Wilson on any information he gave and to use the same for himself and partner afterwards. On the morning Wilson saw witness. atthe.Bp.wen, witness was in, his bath, and "he said there was something struck in the Unicorn, and to go>and buy ICO shares fqr i: him. He had bought shares for himself afterwards. He had spoken to Mr Wilson about payment, and he; had ? { several times said witness should never lose anything by him. Had to pay calls, and witness urged Wilson to sell, the ■hares and to pay the calls. The account had been rendered several times. All the several sums were paid out of the partnership funds. Mr Wilson several times promised to pay. He one time offered to pay 10s a week for three months, and £1 pet week thereafter. When the first summons was issued Mr Wilson had' • offered to compromise by several offers of £5, £10, and £20, which witness declined. He didn't see that he should take #20 for what had cost him £47.105. He summoned first in his own name because he believed he could sue alone, having dis--eolyed with, Mr-Woodward. When "he found he was not likely to be successful he withdrew that summons.

Crbss-examined by Mr Tyler — The understanding was that as Mr Wilson bad fixp jnpneyhe was to buy shares for Wilson arid give him credit." There was no'arrangement to share- the profits. He had bought shares for defendant knowing he had no money, the same as he had for many people.. Witness bought 100 shares for himself and partner on the same day as the 100 were bought.;for, Wilson, the 27th June, 1872.

Mr Tyler said plaintiffs needn't go any further. .-^k. : i ' ■,; ~ '■'.'■

Judgment for plaintiffs £47 10s, andcosts, £8 3s. '

Court adjourned.