392 Co-operative Dairies in Denmark. 
dairies in private ownership the reporter finds that under this 
system the return per 1,000 lb. milk varies between 34s. 3 d. and 
40s. 0 d., and is thus notably inferior to that obtained under the 
co-operative dairy system. 
J. M. H. Munro. 
SALE AND DELIVERY OF CORN. 
As the bulk of the corn that is sold by English farmers is, I sup- 
pose, sold at market by sample, a note of the case of Perkins v. Bell 1 
which relates to barley sold in that way may, I think, be instruc- 
tive. The case was originally tried before Mr. Justice Lawrance at 
the Leicester Assizes, but was subsequently decided by the Court of 
Appeal. The facts were few and simple, and (except perhaps the 
accidental mixing of the less valuable barley with the more valuable) 
were such as are not unlikely to happen on a sale of corn by a 
farmer on any market day. 
The plaintiff, Mr. Perkins, was a farmer. The defendant, Mr. 
Bell, was a corndealer, who had a stand in Leicester Market. At that 
market the plaintiff, on October 4, 1890, sold by sample thirty-one 
quarters of barley to the defendant at 34s. a quarter, to be delivered 
in sacks at Theddingworth Station, which is a roadside railway sta- 
tion about two and a half miles from the plaintiff’s farm. On the 
same day the defendant resold the barley by the same sample to 
some brewers at Sileby at an advance of 2s. per quarter. On Oc- 
tober 7 the plaintiff sold to the defendant in Market Harborough 
Market three more quarters of barley, of not such good quality as the 
first, and it was arranged that the plaintiff should send to the defen- 
dant a sample of this barley, that the price of it should be afterwards 
agreed upon, and that it should be delivered at . Theddingworth 
Station in sacks in the same way as the larger quantity was to be 
delivered. When the plaintiff reached home from Market Harbo- 
rough Market on October 7 he found that his men, whilst winnowing 
the three quarters, had, contrary to his orders, mixed them with the 
thirty-one quarters, and he at once wrote to the defendant to tell 
him what had happened, adding that, if the defendant complained 
that it would make any difference to him in the sample, he (the 
plaintiff) would make it good, but he hoped it would not. Upon the 
receipt of this letter on October 8 the defendant wrote to the station 
master at Theddingworth Station to forward him a sample of about 
thirty-five quarters of barley delivered by Mr. Perkins. This the 
station master did, taking the sample out of twenty of the thirty- 
four quarters which had then arrived at his station. The rest arrived 
there the next day. The station master, as both parties admitted, 
took a fair sample. Having inspected this sample, the defendant 
1 Reported in the La?v Eejports for 1893, 1 Queen's Bench, p. 193. 
