640 
THE TROPICAL AOfUCiyLTURI^T, 
[March 2, 1891. 
elevation between 5,000 and C,000 feet; good soft 
wither ; rolled in Jackson’s Excelsior ; fired in Venetian ; 
temperature during time of manufacture about 80°. 
After rolling half-hour small sifted out, and large 
leaf re-rolled another half-hour hard. Samples 
manufactured from same roll. 
A. 
Tasted 29th iiugust 1890. 
Half-hour fermented 
Order of Merit, 
2nd 
£. 
Two hours 
1st 
0. 
Four hours 
3rd 
D. 
Six hours 
4th 
First in order of merit decidedly better than second. 
Second has much better quality and flavor than No. 
3 but is much inferior in strength. Fourth is deci- 
dedly the worst. 
(Signed) nEEBEET T.tEEANT. 
29th August 1890 1 
The above teas were opened on the 5th of February, 
1891 — five mouths afterwards, and the following is 
the report ; — 
A- Decidedly the best. Had gone off the least and 
still retained its flavor, 
B. 'i Cannot separate these two teas. Both gone off 
0. >a good deal. 
D, 3 Much the worst from every point of view. 
Had gone off altogether. 
(Signed) Heeheet Taerant. 
— Local “Times.” 
^ 
THE KOLA-NUT TEAHE. 
At the Liverpool County Court before his honor, 
Judge Collier, Messrs. Broadbridge & Co,, of 
Li verpool, general produce dealers, brought an 
action against Messrs. Thomas Christy k Co , London, 
drug importers, to recover the sum ol SOI lOs 2d, the 
price of nine barrels of kola nuts which were sold by 
the plaintiffs to the defendants on November IT last, 
Mr. Steel appeared for the plaintiffs and Mr. Pickford 
for the defendants. 
Mr. Steel, in opening the case, put in letters and 
correspondenoe which had passed between the plaintiffs 
and defendants in refereuca to the kola nuts. The 
plaintiff's on November 7 wrote to iho defendants, 
asking them if tliey were buying kola nuts, as they 
were brokers in Liverpool and their friends had some 
for sale. On November 12 defendants replied that 
they were buyers of kola nuts, if of good quality and 
reasonable price. Plaintiff’s then sent samples of the 
nnts to the defendants, and stated that the owners 
would accept 6d per lb. The s.imples were sent on 
November 14bh aud on the 15th defendants agreed to 
purchase certain nine bariel--. Defendants said that 
some of the barrels were not as good as the others, 
and for these they would give 5d per lb., aud that 
if the offer was accepted, plaintiffs were to forward 
the lot to iheir address, but the plaintiffs were to 
examine each lot aud see that there was no palm oil 
on the nuts. There was no palm oil on the 
nuts and on the 1/ th the barrels of kola nuts 
were sent. On receiving the nuts detendants wrote 
that they were not up to sample and were of an 
inferior quality. They offered to pay 4d per lb. for 
certain samples. Plaintiffs replied that their samplas 
fairly represented the bulk, and they could take no 
reduction. Hence the dispute. Plaintiffs offered 
according to the conditions of sale of the 
Oeueral Brokers’ Association, to leave the dispute to 
arbitration. PhuuUffs ssid they did not sell on “ guar- 
anteed sound,” but “ according to sample.” They 
asked for payment of the nuts, as dofendaiits would 
not have arbitration in the case. On Dec. 3rd difen- 
dauts sent to th.e plaintiffs a cheque for 22^ 4s 101 
instead of the 30/ 7s lOd which plaintiffs claimed. They 
returned the che<iue. Defendants lead now paid tlio 
22Ms lOd into court, and thtty claimed tho sum of If 
Is whief they had jiiid in Loudon to outside brokers to 
examine tlio kola nuts tin ro. 
George Frederick Howard, amomberof tho plaintiffs’ 
firm, said: On Oct. 22nd wo received a cousigninont 
qt kola uuts, aud sold this cousigumeut as tho brokers. 
The nuts came from the West Coast of Africa. When 
the steamer arrived the nuts were stored in Liverpool. 
They were unpacked aud emptied out on the floor in 
bulk. Each lot was kept separate. On Nov. 12th I 
gave instruotions to my warehousemsn to take some 
samples. Tnreo samples were taken and sent by my 
foreman to the defendants. I was not present when 
these samples vrere tiken. I saw the large 
samples in our office which were brought from the 
warehouse. The largest sample from five barrels would 
bo about 10 lb and the others much smaller. I ex- 
amined the samples and found that those from five 
barrels were bright, clear, good kola nuts, and in good 
condition. Three barrels aud a ca^e were not so bright. 
The nuts in the five barrels were in a good condition, 
except a few. Some of them wore mouldy and of a 
dark colour. Fresh kola nuts ought to bo ot a briglitish 
colour. We cut the dark ones open to see if the 
damage extended, hut found it only existed on the 
outside. Tha condition of the othe. lols was similar, 
but they bad not such a brighi appearance. They 
were of a redbrick odour. I did not see the small 
samples sent to London. 
Cross-examined: We sold the uuts as brokers 
for the firm of Henty & Co. I have not a great 
experience of these kola nuts, I have sold them 
before, but not the fresh ones. This was the first 
lot of fresh ones we sold. I have seen three or four 
lots of fresh ones. My firm are general produce 
brokers. In,ver saw the hii k of the nuts. It is not 
customary to do so when goods are sold as samples. 
The warehouseman saw the nuts. After being stored 
the uuts were out of the barrels all the time. When 
sold they were repacked. The nuts were good lots. 
The firm did not sell on “guarantee sound,” but on 
“ sample.” The firm knew that a few of the nuts 
were not sound. The sample was a fair sample of the 
bulk. The firm took a smaller price for the uuts 
because they were not so fresh as on arrival. It was 
true they were deteriorating and beginning to grow 
mouldy. I do not, however, think that th; y had de- 
teriorated to the extent of Id. per lb. When I re- 
ceived the complaint about the condition otihehulk 
sent to Loudon I did not get them examined on my 
own behalf, as I desired ttie matter to go to arbitra- 
tion. Tho arbitrators would then have had the samples 
examined. When I found the defendants would not 
arbitrate I thought it was no use for me to do any- 
thing in the matter. According to the rules of the 
General Pruduce Brokers’ Association each side in a 
dispu'e could appoint an arbitrator. If one side 
ueglecied after three days’ notice to do so, the As- 
sociation could appoint one. The defendants sent 
down samples of what they said the bulk of the ko'a 
nuts were like. The arbitrators could have called 
for whatever samples they liked if appointed. Defen- 
dants had the nuts. I am not a member of the 
General Brokers’ Associariun. I never named an arbi- 
trator because the goods had gone from the firm’s 
possession, and arbitration would have been no good. 
Tho defendants ignored everything, aud it would have 
been no good, going on without them. The delay in 
selling th<? goods caused them to deteriorate to a 
slight extent. If they had been quickly sold they 
could have got Id pir lb. more. » 
Eobeit Taylor, the plaintiffs’ warehouseman, corobefy 
rated the last witness’s testimony. He also said the 
nuts were sampled by means of a spade. They' were 
lifted by a spade into paper. A shovel was employed 
to got as fair a sample as they could. The general 
condition of the nuts was good, although some were 
not sound. The nnts were all mixed through when a 
sample was taken. After taking the large samples they 
were taken up to the. office, 
Cross-examiusd : I have seen many samples 
of kola nuts in different warehouses. I have 
seen fresh ones. The nuts were tampled alter 
they had been lying on the floor for three days. 
I did not examine the nuts when I put them in 
the barrels ngaio. 
Ee- 0 xamined by Mr. Steel: — The nuts were brought 
from the quay on Oct. 27th and were emptied on the 
floor a week after to keep them dry. Ihe nuts would 
