CLAIM FOR £lOOO.

Waikato Times, Volume 117, Issue 19601, 13 June 1935, Page 8

CLAIM FOR £IOOO.

FARM DEALINGS IN WAIKATO.

•FURTHER EVIDENCE HEARD

AUCKLAND, Thursday.

Further evidence in the claim and oounter-olaim arising out of a dispute between father and son over liability for £IOOO and the payment for the son’s services in farming property in the Waikato district was heard before Mr Justice Fair in the Supreme Court yesterday. The plaintiff was Edward Allen, retired farmer, formerly of Cambridge, but now of Auckland (Mr North), and the defendant, Clifford Thornton Allen, farmer, of Okoroire (Mr Grant). Plaintiff claimed from defendant £IOOO, which, he alleged, the latter had agreed to pay him on or after March 1, 1934. Defendant counterclaimed £234 as expenses in attending to stock sales on behalf of his father, £SOO for the supervision of farms, and £625 for buying and selling stock. Although defendant contended that a total of £1359 was due to him, he was prepared to accept a cancellation of the debt of £IOOO. > Evidence of Plaintiff. Plaintiff, In evidence, said he went to the Waikato district in 1879 and had been farming there ever since. He was now 88 years of age. He had bought stick about a year ago, and could do so to-day. In the agreement of 1928 defendant agreed to pay £IOOO on or after March 1, 1934. At the time witness’ son expressed himself as being perfectly satisfied with the agreement, as a result of which he received the farm and a considerable quantity of slock for £IOOO, which was to he paid without interest in six years. After the agreement was signed, witness did not remember asking his son to see him at the Cambridge property. He denied that lie had asked defendant to resume the supervision of his farms, and the buying and selling of stock. Plaintiff said he regarded the £IOOO as an asset and he denied that he had even hinted that Ihe debt would be cancelled. Cross-examined by Mr Grant, witness said that, apart from buying a few head of stock, for which he had been compensated, defendant had not done any work for him. Witness admitted that on previous occasions he had cancelled debts, amounting to thousands of pounds, owing by other members of the family. Ten years ago witness remarried, and he admitted there had since been a “cooling” between himself and members of Ins family by his first wife. The Court adjourned until to-day for the presentation of legal argument.