Second Thoughts on a

Samoan Govt.

Brings Suit

Stone-Crusher

TN „ indo-ment delivered May 2 of Western Samoa, Judge C. C.

Marsack, the sale of a Public Works Department stone-crusher was set aside on a legal technicality but an order °for the"return of the crusher was not given. An amount of £125 was awarded the Samoan Govern ment as representing the value of a diesel engine.

The “stone-crusher” case had ex cited considerable interest in Western Samoa.

The Government of Western Samoa claimed the return of a stone-crusher and a diesel engine or their equivalent value, this claim being detailed as follows: (A) Possession of a Hadfield stone-crusher, or a sum of £l,OOO if possession cannot be had. . . . ..(B) Possession 6f a McLaren diesel engine, or £5OO if possession cannot be had. (C) £5O damages for detention of the stone-crusher.

(D) £5O damages for detention of diesel engine.

In presenting the Government’s case, the Attorney-General stated the action concerned the disposal of a Hadfield H^°?pl'Vnffine e both n pur- McLaren dieselengine, both pur chased by the Government in 1948 for a total of £2,869.

After negotiations, which were rather confused, this equipment was

s»sunr"

In giving judgment, the Court stated mai.

“The plaintiff has succeeded not on the merits but on the technical delegation of power Ordinance from the High

T?easurer was

S^de 1 without legal authority

AltSoi been lit

aside, this sale and purchase was a bona fide transaction and defendant acted in good faith throughout,

the £fendant 0^ ed

costs against the aeienoani.

The judgment of the High Court has surprised some people in view of the contradictory evidence given during the hearing of the case. In |worn s * a £ f nnr , w °^ s nf ticularly the Acting Director of Wor ks, M r. E. E. Hendricksen, and the chief clerk, Mr. J. R. Lee, gave completely different versions of the transaction, the former stating that the matter of the disposal of the

stone-crusher and the diesel < had never been referred to hiu had definitely ap HendHCKsen hadl aeimiwiy ap. tradictions in the sworn state Qf tho witnesses . The FiE Secretary> Mr L M cook, stss evidence that he had given ape 0 j transaction conditional approval of Mr. Hendricksen, g.;s—- «»• -■ - Evidence was given, thaj crusher and engine had not condemned or written off; it w junk. dofen D Atoa evidence stated that he had i a stone-crusher to supply c: metal under a contract with L. A. Pearson He had apprj hiring 7 n

f public Work

ue^aia

crusher and Mr. Lee,’after i phone conversation with Mr. told him th at Mr cook agi Hendricksen approved. M we pt to Mr. Hendricksen’s and returned) saying thaj Hendricksen had accepted th*.

Mr - Atoa stated that he h£^ goon to the PWD for repan making parts * p In early May, the Govei was considering an appeal Supreme Court of New Zeals