JlNE 1. 1914.] 



THE INDIA RUBBER WORLD 



483 



Rubber Arbitration Extracts. 



The obvious adtviiiagcs of commercial arbitration liave been set forth in The India Rubber World imth some frequency dur- 

 ing the last two years, and much consideration has also been given to this subject by the Rubber Club of America. One point 

 to be emphasised is the relatively insignificant expense of this method of procedure as compared with the cost of litigation. In 

 the various cases arbitrated by the Chamber of Commerce of the Slate of New York, wliere from one to three arbitrators were 

 engaged, the cost in no instance has exceeded $150. and in some cases has fallen below $40. In other words, the expense is 

 ncglieiblc. 



Alvl'iITRATION of differences between buyers and sellers of 

 rubber is an old slory in London. In N'evv Vork, bovvever. 

 tbe custom is not as general, it is tberefore of interest 

 to be able to read a series of questions and answers at one of 

 the arbitration proceedings. It may be said in passing that the 

 •case was settled to the satisfaction of all and at trifling cost. 

 The rubber was unsmoked Eastern Plantation sheet and biscuit, 

 the shipment calling for fair averai;<.' i|uality. I'he arbitratinn 

 proceedings ran as follows : 

 Statement by Mr. .'\. — 



It may perhaps be not amiss just at tliis moment to say that 

 j)erhaps this decision will be more far reaching than anticipated 

 when we took up this question. If the standards that we are 

 passing on today are to be accepted by merchants as being a 

 projier delivery, the merchants in turn shipping those to manu- 

 facturers, and upon orders taken from them in tlic course of 

 the sale <if this (|uality, afterwards we being compelled to ac- 

 cept this as tender of the quality, and then being delivered to 

 the manufacturers in accordance, and upon receipt by them. 

 they refusin.g to accept it as proper tender nf the i|uality bought, 

 this would put the operator ami the dealer in a very bad posi- 

 tion. We have no redress from the manufacturers unless we 

 wish to enter into a legal battle with them, if w^e accept this 

 <|uality as proper tender, and when tendered by us to the manu- 

 facturers, and afterwards being rejected by them as not being 

 the proper tender, in such cases that would be the result. There- 

 fore, if this quality upon which we are arbitrating today is to 

 be established, it will create a standard, so to speak, for future 

 tenders, that may pass in the transactions between merchants. 



This tender of sheets and biscuits that was made by 



Company was rejected by us on account of not being a proper 

 tender of the quality. I just want to say that the quality that 

 was handed to us we claim is the quality that is sold in London 

 its sheets and biscuits and not first latex sheets and biscuits. 

 I want to emphasize that distinction. 

 Statement by Mr. B. — 



1 object to the introduction as evidence consisting of circular 

 letters from English houses. In the first place, the contract is 

 made based on New York quality. There are contracts made 

 in the trade as understood in London. There is notliing in 

 these contracts stating the qualities as understood in London. 

 Mr. A. has stated that there are different qualities sold in Lon- 

 don as first and second. I do not dispute that, but we do not 

 sell these goods, shipment in London ; as a matter of fact, the 

 shipment was made from Colombo. 



Mr. C. — .^n arbitrator. 



I know that there are London rules and regulations, but I 

 .^m not familiar with them, except that I know there are grades, 

 and they buy on description, 



Mr. A. — I wish to state that the contracts do not say that the 

 i|uality is represented by New York standards or anything else. 



Mr. B. — The intent of the contract as to delivery and deter- 

 mination of the quahty, is always understood as to the port or 

 ■city or town or place where the rubber is delivered. There 

 is nothing stated about delivery in London. The contract states 

 delivery in New York. Consequently the determination of the 

 quality would be as understood in the trade, and not as under- 

 stood in Londnn. 

 Question by Mr. A. — 



Testimony of Mr. D., a weigher who assisted in drawing the 

 samples. 



Q. Did you find the rubber in any of the cases damj) and 

 mouldy? If so, to what extent? A. 15 to 25 per cent. 



Q. When you say this rubber was damp and mouldy, did 

 you find it wet? Did you find it wet in any jiart <if the case? 

 A. Certainly, in the center. 



Q. How did you find the general condition of the cases that you 

 ■examined? A. The dampness was in the middle and also 

 mould. Some cases were mouldy throughout. 



Q. Was it a wet mould or dry? A. Dry on the outside 

 and in the center it was damp. 



Q. Was the rubber taken out of the cases? A. Yes. 



(J- Did you get all the rubber back in the same cases after- 

 wards? A. No. 



sj. You state the rubber was damp. Don't you think you 

 could have got it all back if the rubber was stuck together or 

 mouldy? A. It would be impossible to get it all back. 

 Questions by Mr. B. — 



Q. Taking these samples as drawn and t!ie condition of the 

 rubber as found in the cases, the way they were sealed and 

 wrapped up, would you say they would deteriorate or improve 

 1 r change in any way from your knowledge of rubber since 

 they have been here? A. I don't think they would. 

 Question by Mr. A. — 



Q. Any rubber of any nature that has been taken from 

 cases or bags, drawn out from the lot, separated and put in 

 small packages, do you mean to say it will contain the same 

 condition of moisture as if left in the case? Do you mean to 

 say the sainplcs would be drier or wetter, or that they would 

 be in the same condition as wdicn they were drawn ? A. Natu- 

 rally they would be a little drier packed in a bag. 

 Stateircnl by Mr. B.— 



If Mr. D. testifies that tlie samples have changed since being 

 taken out of the cases I do not think the arbitrators can render 

 a decision as to how inuch they have gone back. 

 Testimony of Mr. K. — 



By Mr. A. — Q. When in London on different occasions you 

 familiarized yourself with different qualities of rubber that were 

 being offered and sold and bought here in this country on 

 London standards? A. Yes. 



Q. Deliveries made against contracts that are not up to the 

 London standards, have their rejections been upheld? A. 

 They have arbitration there. 



Q. Have you in your experience in the United States re- 

 jected plantation rubber or otherwise on account of inferiority 

 of quality? A. Several times. 



Q. From London standards? A. Yes. 



Q. This particular contract, there was nothing stated in it 

 as understood in London? A. No. 



Q. You did not purchase it in that way with that intention 

 at the time? A. The intention when we bought that rubber 

 was that it was to be to the standard. 



Q. .As it was understood in London? A. As it was under- 

 stood in London. 



Q. In making sales here of rubber, you make sales as under- 

 stood in London and sometimes not? A. I generally sell ac- 

 cording to sample or quality. 



Q. As per sample? Then you sell sometimes as understood 

 in London? A. Very seldom. 



O. Then what has the London standard to do with this 

 case? A. A great deal. 



Q. But you sell rubber both ways. You have made contracts 

 as understood in London; have you not? A. I do not know 

 whether we have ever made one. 



Q. Never have? You sell simply on New York standard? 

 A. On our own standard. 



O. This particular transaction was made on fair average 

 quality and usual good quality in New York. We did not sell 

 you this rubber on any of your own standards that there may 

 be in New' York. 

 Statement by Mr. B. — 



This contract was made in New York. It is dated in New- 

 York. The rubber was delivered in New York. Now I do not 

 see how they can bring in any London business. I would like 

 to have a decision on that as to the London business. The 

 contract is made here, the sale of it and delivered in New York. 

 Question by Mr. B. — 



Q. You make your own standard ' There is a recognized 

 standard for rubber in New York. A. I know there is, but I 

 say New York standard follows London. 

 Testimony of lilr. F. — An arbitrator. 



By Mr. B. — Q. In your opinion a contract calling for fair 

 avera.ge quality unsmoked sheets and biscuits, and another con- 

 tract calling for good merchantable quality unsmoked sheets 



