LAND SALE DISPUTE

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 73, Issue 428, 20 November 1930, Page 12

LAND SALE DISPUTE

MISREPRESENTATION ALLEGED FARM LAND AT POREWA Six witnesses out of a total of 18 were heard at the Supreme Court yesterday during a case of a dispute following the sale of a farm of 2624 acres, two miles on the Wanganui side of Porcwa. on the Marton-Huntorvillo roa-L Joseph Francis Oakley, farmer, of Marton, proceeded against Isaac Jefferson, farmer, of Taumarunui, for a recission of the contract of sale on the grounds of misrepresentation, and for the refund of £2029 15s Id and interest and £231 4s 3d costs of transfer and alternatively £3937 10s damages. A counter-claim was filed for £3.89 7s fid, as payments overdue on a mortgage, and for interest on the mortgage to the date of judgment. Messrs A. M. Ongley and P- E. Baldwin (Palmerston North] appeared for

plaintiff, and Messrs W. J. Treadwell (Wanganui) and ,T. TL L. Stanford (Marton) for defendant. Details of Claim The statement of claim set out. that on or about June 26, 1929, plaintiff entered into an agreement in writing to buy the land from defendant for the sum of £13.125, being equivalent, to £5O an acre. The contract was completed on August 8, 1929, and the plaintiff paid to the defendant the sum of £2029 15s Id. obtaining a transfer of the property and executing in the defendant’s favour a first mortgage of £11.125 to secure the balance of purchase money with interest. Tt; was alleged that it; had been stated that the farm would carry 1100 ewes without cropping, and that defendant had said that he could carry five ewes to the acre on the property. Acting in faith with the representations, plaintiff completed the contract. The plaintiff had since discovered. and the fact was. that the property would not carry more than 700 ewes on the pasture without cropping. The plaintiff had incurred £231 4s 3d expenses in connection with the transfer and mortgage. It was held that the property was worth not more than £35 an acre. The plaintiff asked that the contract of sale be rescinded and that the defendant bo ordered tft pay plaintiff £2029 15s Id. £231 4s 3d with interest at 8 per cent., and that the. memorandum of mortgage be delivered for cancellation, and that defendant be ordered to pay costs. Statement of Defence The statement of defence set out that defendant said that if any representation was made to the plaintiff, whicli defendant denied, the plaintiff had been guilty of delay and acquiescence, disentitling him to recission of payment. If defendant had made any statements with regard to the carrying capacity of the land, which was denied, then such statements were a mere expression of opinion and did not induce the plaintiff to enter into the contract and that the plaintiff did not rely on any such representations. The Counter Claim A counter-claim was filed for £389 7s 6d. this being claimed as interest due at July 8, .1930, and interest on the sum 0f'£11.125 from July 8, 1930. to date of judgment at the rate of seven per cent.

The defence to the counter-claim admitted the money as being due, but said the plaintiff was induced to execute the memorandum of mortgage by the -fraud of the defendant. Plaintiff’s Evidence Joseph Francis Oakley, plaintiff, 32 years of age, said he had been farming on and off for 15 years. After selling out of a dairy farm at Ohakea, he was quoted the property in dispute and inspected the property about ten days before the papers were signed. When he first saw the stock on the place they looked to be in quite good condition, Harris the land agent told him that the ;»)aue was carrying 1100 ewes. There was no sign of recent cropping. When he saw defendant he was told that the place had always carried 1100 ewes and one year had carried five to the acre on pasture. About one third was topdressed each year with 2cwt- of super to the acre. Jefferson said that he would not guarantee that others could carry five ewes. When witness said he would be inclined to top dress the whole farm, defendant said he would be over-run with feed. Defendant would not consider a reduction in the price as ho said the place was worth it. Before he signed the agreement, jvitness went out to the farm twice and had a discussion about; purchase of the sheep. Witness offered 35s as his limit; to buy Ihe line of stock, but defendant want'd 38s. At Jefferson’s clearing sale ho “■"ilgli.t 750 4-tooth ewes at 36s 2d. Some 200 other sheep were also sold. I’ E ndnnt had staled that that he had ent two trucks of sheep to Taumarnnui. After being on the farm about three weeks ho secured 15 tons of mangels and other food. Immediately witness took possession, he had seven tons of super put on, and three tons a little later. Some 40 acres had been topdressed. thus making 140 acres topdressed. To shearing time he lost 47 ewes in the winter. His first draught of fats in December was just below 26 per cent. That year nearly all the iambs suffered from sore noses owing •o the thistles. On the suggestion of farmer he put bullocks and wethers ;>n the bad paddocks and mowed them. He grew .100 tons of mangels, nine acres of oats, and also turnips. In March he bought 10 tons of top-dress-ing. which practically finished the

farm. Shorn near the end of January, the ewes average under nine pounds in clip. About 150 were sent to the works. In reply to the ■Judge, he said he had paid £2OOO cash. In his second year he put out 852 ewes. He was over-stocked, if anything, with 850 ewes. Witness had told defendant that ho did not think he could get through with the 900 sheep on the place. Defendant said the spring was very light; ami that he would have more feed than be could eat off. Defendant said that the top-dressing

could not be acting as it did once. Defendant agreed to giving witness a month’s extension for interest due in January. Witness went to defendant at Taumarunui to ask for a reduction, and showed him his lamb and wool returns, and said he was out of pocket as a result of buying the farm. Three days later ■witness received a letter demanding the interest. When cross-examined by Air Trendwell. plaintiff said be had had no experience of Marton country. He agreed with Mr Treadwell that successful farming was dependant upon knowledge of the country and the ability of the man himself. When passing the farm, Mr Harris had told him that Mr

Jefferson had said that the farm would carry 1100 ewes. Witness denied that defendant had said that he had carried over 1000 ewes the year before. Jefferson would not give him a guarantee that he could carry live ewes for five years as he had said he did not know what kind of a farmer witness was. He did not say to Jefferson, "Do you think I could carry five ewes if I top-dressed the whole farm?’’ At the sale, buying through an agent, he bought, the old ewes, which were sound in the mouth, and passed by 200 two-tooths as they were too dear. There was no growth to speak of during the autumn and there was not much feed on 115 acres which had been mowed for thistles at three inches, swept, and top-dressed and chain harrowed. In .1929, spring and summer were late and wet, autumn dry and the winter mild. At Taumarunui witness said he wanted a reduction in. the purchase price and that, interest should be paid yearly instead of half-yearly. He told Jefferson that, the place would not carry 1100 ewes and all it would carry was 850. Mr Jefferson told him his sheep were too old. Jefferson had not said at that interview that he had farmed the place with 1000 ewes. Before he bought, he knew the place was short of feed. He told Mr Smith, across the road, that the price was £5O an acre. Witness denied that Air Smith had said that if he could not make provision for one or two bad years he had better not buy. It was not to his knowledge that two paddocks had gone back in his first year on the farm. He denied a suggestion from Air Treadwell that 24 acres, which had been ploughed, was only growing weeds. It was his impression that Jefferson wanted to foreclose? on the mortgage and push him off the farm. A Air Lampe said he would believe what Air Jefferson had said. A Air Lampe said Jefferson would be right if he. said anything. Witness did not agree that more young ewes could bo carried than old ewes.

Re-examined, witness said that at two dockings he had had just a bit over 100 per cent, lambs. Ploughing had not been attended to because if he wont off the farm he would get no benefit.

Robert Wakefield Harris, land agent, of Alarton, said he had received instructions to sell the farm and also for the sale of 1.100 ewes. He had told plaintiff the carrying capacity was .1100 ewes, when they passed the place when, returning from inspecting another. Oakley and Jefferson met with ■ him and his clerk (Air Kingdon) at. witness’ office on June 26, when the agreement was made. Plaintiff thought the property dear, but defendant said it was worth the money and he would not sell if he did not 'get his price. Defendant said he could show oyer £6OO profit at that price. In figuring it out then for proof, defendant had used 1100 ewes as a basis and counted on top-dressing a third of the property. The figures showed a profit of £620. Defendant said he would not guarantee five ewes to the acre on another man’s farming. Cross-examined by Air Treadwell, witness said he had always heard that Air Jefferson’s word could be relied upon. Air Treadwell: If I tell you that the place was not for sale what would you

''witness: Mr Jefferson told me that the other agents had it, ami I might as well have a shot at it too. Mr Treadwell: I suggest to you that you approached him ami asked if you could sell the property? Witness: No, that, is not correct. Witness said further that he received verbal instruction* to sell the farm. He had been told not to advertise it and not to put it on his books. Mr Jefferson had not told him a fortnight before the sale that it was withdrawnMr Jefferson had given him the carrying capacity as 110(1. Witness said that he had not’stated during the last, week that he did not remember where he got the figure 1100 from, but might have not it front Mr Oswald, Jefferson. ’ Richard Guy Percy .Kingdon. clerk at the former witness’ office, said, that at the interview in the office .Mr Jet ferson had said the, land could . carry five ewes to the acre. He said he would not guarantee that on another man’s farming.

Cecil Dobbs, farmer, formerly, manager for Air Jefferson’s property, said when he took over the management ot the property there, were only 605 sheep on the place that, could have been breeding ewes in the previous seasonThey were 625 four-toothed ewes. 42'.' two-toothed ewes, 424 lambs, 341 twotoothed wethers, and 17 rams. In October when he had about 1000 sheep on the place 113 sheep were taken to another farm and when he left. _ those sheep were going to Taumarunui. M ith 000 odd sheep and lambs, feed was still short. Later on ho took 169 and !-■ ewes awav and later further mobs ot 294, 129 and 153 were taken away to hired grazing as feed was short. That should not have left many on the place. Mr .Jefferson had told him that it was unnecessary to take grazing. Witness said that ewes were low and lambs were going back. Hubert Cleland. Government Stock Inspector produced sheep returns ot the property. The 1926 return was 640. 19:’7 was 1680. 1928 vas 927. 1929 was 1066. The returns were made about the end of April in each yrar. Alfred Solar, farmer, said he had about, 3100 acres in a sheep farm near the farm in dispute. He had been farming there for about 17 years. He had been over Air Jefferson’s farm several times since Air Oakley had been there'. The land had been under light bush and manuka. If cropping paddocks were sown down they would be giving then greatest feeding return at the fust year. Mr Oakley’s practice in cutting the Californian thistles and following with swopping and harrowing was a good farming method- The farm was better the year the thistles were cut. The sheep were looking better and the pasture's fresher than last year. One paddock was ploughed because Ihe grass had run right out and ploughing was the only thing for it. He would say that there was nothing in any statement that the plough position ‘‘was in a frightful mess-’’ The two seasons Air Oakley had been in ihe district had not been vastly different from Hie usual. I'p to the present time the place had been fully stocked, at times over-stocked. This winter he was shorter than most farmers would like to be and the winter before, he was shorter still. Without crops, he would not. like to carry more than throe sheep to the

Cross examined by Air Stanford, wit ness said Mr Jefferson was regarded as a successful farmer. Tt was safe to mow thistles into Into autumn, which would freshen the pastures. The Court then adjourned until 10