April i, i88g.j TH£ TROPICAL AG8ieULTURI§T, 663 
■ r " -t ■■ ■ 1 ■-. Oii^ -r- 1 1 rrr 1 1 i - nmni r iW»iii «wi r - • ' 
and of damage to the tea. Mr. R. B. Finlay, Q.C., 
M.P., and Mr. Hollams were counsel for the plain- 
tiffs ; while Mr. fi. T. Reid, Q.C., M.P., and Mr. Stuart 
Sankey were counsel for the defendants. 
Mr. Finlay, in opening the case, said the plaintiffs, 
Messrs. Thomas Barlow & Brother, were merchants 
carrying on business in Feuchurch-street, E.O., and 
at Manchester, and they had also houses in China 
and India. The defendants were tea warehousemen, 
and the action was brought to recover £257 as the 
loss on a certain parcel of tea which was stored 
by plaintiffs with defendants, and which, owing to 
the condition of defendants' premises, or some other 
cause, was damaged while under defendants' care. 
The tea in question was consigned from Hankow on 
May 29th, 1888, by the plaintiffs in China to their 
house in England. The tea was in two parcels, tbe 
first parcel being that in respect of which the action 
was brought. This first parcel was described on the 
invoice aB A. 1. 2, and cousisted of 261 packages of 
Ningchow oongo chopped with ' the words " Tsing- 
sing." These parcels, which were identical in quality 
and counterparts of one another, were stored wit h 
defendants on their arrival in England on June 
25tb. The second parcel was not stored in the same 
part of the warehouse as the first and this accounted 
for the fact that while the first parcel was damage 1 
the second was not. Plaintiffs had arranged with 
Messrs. Ripley, Howse & Co.. tea brokers, to sell 
the first parcel of tea ; while the second parcel was 
confided to other brokers. "When the tea arrive.) 
the defendants sent samples from the two first 
chests in each parcel to the importers, and the 
brokers were supplied on application with their 
samples to sell from. Mr, Mitchell, the representa- 
tive of plaintiffs' house in London, inspected samples 
of both parcels, and found that they were of a 
very fine quality and absolutely identical, and he 
also found they were identical with the samples sent, 
to Messrs. Ripley, Howse & Co., the selling brokers. 
The second parcel was speedily sold to a consider- 
able extent, and fetched the high price of Is 6d per 
lb., and the plaintiffs wished to get the same price 
for the first parcel, as the quality was identical to 
the second. 
His Lordship : — Was this a Mincing-lane sale ? 
Mr. Finlay said the tea was not sold by auction 
but by private contract. Plaintiffs expected to realise 
the same price for this other parcel, but for some 
reason they did not succeed. An offer of Is 5|d was 
made and refused. The result was the tea remained in 
defendants' warehouse until after the 22nd August, when 
the discovery was made that the tea was damaged. 
On the 2nd August, there being a demand for this 
tea, Messrs. Ripley, Howes & Co. sent to take further 
samples of it, and it was then found that during its stay 
in defendants' warehouse the tea had acquired what was 
known in the trade as a foreign smell — a damp, appley- 
cheesy smell. Plaintiffs believed that the tea acquired 
this smell through being impregnated with the fumes 
arising from wines and spirits stored in the vaults 
below. Everyone in the trade knew that tea quickly 
acquired the smell of various things near it, and it 
would readily acquire a fine orange flavour if placed 
beside oranges. The capacity of tea to take up odours 
of this kind varied at different times, but everyone 
knew that there was great danger of tea acquiring 
smells, and that it must be kept in a place where 
there was no possibility of this contagion. The dis- 
covery of the foreigu smell considerably surprised 
the brokers' and plaintiffs' agent, Mr. Mitchell, and 
the defendants were at once informed of the fact that 
the tea had deteriorated. The manager to the defen- 
dants, Mr. Buchanan, a good judge of tea, admitted 
that this tea was "rather flat." This gentleman went 
With Mr. Mitchell and the brokers to the warehouse and 
took furthe samples, but they all had the same 
smell. They also took four samples from the socond 
parcel of tea, which had been kept in a different 
part of the war house. These latter samples did not 
show the least deterioration from the quality exhibited 
on their arrival. On Mr. Howso suggesting that the 
deterioration waa due to impregnation with the fumes 
of wines and spirits, Mr. Buchanan said : " Oh, that 
is impossible, as there is three feet of concrete between 
these warehouses and the vaults below." The brokers 
were then instructed to sell the tea on behalf of those 
whom it might concern, and it was sold " according 
to brokers's marks." 
His Loedship: — I suppose the parties agree as to the 
amount of damages ? 
Mr. Reid : — I am afraid we cannot, because the 
market fell 2d a lb. in the two months. 
Mr. Mitchell, London manager of plaintiffs' firm, 
then deposed that part of plaintiffs' business consisted in 
exporting homemanufactures to China, and in remitting 
home the proceeds in tea. One of these shipments came 
by a vessel called the "■ Moyune," whioh arrived iu Eng- 
land on June 25th. Onits arrival thedefendants received 
these two parcels of tea, as had been previously ar- 
ranged, and Messrs. Ripley, Howse & Co. had instruc- 
tions to act as selling brokers. This was the first ar- 
rival of that season's tea. On taking the goods into 
the warehouse defendants forwarded witness samples 
of both parcels of the tea. He inspected the samples 
and found them exactly identical in quality. He had 
been in the tea trade as a taster nearly twentv years. 
[Samples of the teas were then handed to the jury 
for inspection.] It was tea of a very fine quality. 
His Lordship: What is "chopping" the tea? 
Witness said it was probably the name the toa went 
by, or the merchant's or seller's name.* The second 
parcel of tea was sold at Is 6d. per lb. He sold 120 
half-chests on the first day. Fresh samples of the first 
pircel were taken on the 22nd Augast to see if it had 
changed, and it was found that it had a foreigu smell, 
and had very seriously deteriorated. He saw Mr. Howse, 
tb.3 selling broker, and they went together to the 
defendants' office, and afterwards to the warehouse. 
They went into the room where the tea was stored, 
and he immediately noticed a very strong smell in the. 
room, which seemed to him exactly the same as the 
srnell on the samples. On that occasion he took four 
iresh samples from four different packages and found 
the same smell in each. These 2)ackages were stored 
one upon another in the ordinary way. He complained 
to Mr. Buchanan, and more samples were drawn 
from this tea and from the other parcel. It was found 
that the second parcel, which was stored in another 
part of the warehouse, was in perfect condition, while 
the other was damaged, and felt warm to the hand. 
The temperature of the room in which the damaged 
tea was stored was very hot, and tbat might account 
for the tea being warm. This damaged tea was sold 
on September 4th by "broker's marks final at public 
auction on account of whom it might concern," and 
notice was given to the defendants. Witness had an 
account of the sale showing a loss to the plaintiffs of 
£257 9s. 5d. The counterpart of the tea having sold 
for Is. 6d. per lb., witness took Is. 6d. as the basis of 
the claim, and the difference between that and the 
actual price realised for the damaged tea was the 
amount of the loss without reference to market. 
Cross-examined by Mr. Reid, q. c. : This was the 
first ship that arrived of this season's tea, and as a 
rule the first shipment fetches the highest price. 
His Loedship: Don't you give a thousand pounds to 
the shippers for the first arrival ? 
Witness said that practice had quite gone out of 
date. The first portion of the second parcel was sold for 
Is. 6d., but they could not get that price for ail of it. 
Some of it was sold at Is. oi-d., and some was not sold at 
all. Between June 25th and August 22nd the market 
price hadfallena little — it might have fallen Id., but not 
2d. When this lot of first parcel was sold at public auc« 
tion itaveraged Is. Ijjd. perpound. It was the practice to 
put two sample packages, representing each parcel in 
the ship, on the to p of the bulk. Sample chests might 
be carried in the c abin separate from tbe bulk. The 
samples taken on the 25th or 26th of June were taken 
from the sample chests. From the first parcel of tea 
samples were draw n on several occasions between June 
25th and August 2:2nd by the selling brokers. 
* Surely a " ch op " of tea is a lot of identical 
quality ?— Ed. 
