Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Great Northern Railway V Witham
Great Northern Railway V Witham
ordered of him for half the requirements of the plaintiffs during 1873
the said period ending the 31st of October, 1872, whereby the Great
Northern
plaintiffs were obliged to procure quantities of iron from other Railway Co.
persons at higher prices than those to be paid as aforesaid, and v.
Witham.
were otherwise injured. Claim, 2000Z.
Pleas: 1. That it was not agreed by and between the plaintiffs
and the defendant, as alleged ; 2. That the plaintiffs did not
require or order iron as in the declaration alleged.
There was also a demurrer to each count of the declaration, on
the ground that it disclosed no consideration for the defendant’s
promise to supply the iron therein mentioned. Issue, and joinder
in demurrer.
The cause was tried before Brett, J., at the sittings at Westmin
ster after the last term. The facts were as follows:—In October,
1871, the plaintiffs advertised for tenders for the supply of goods
(amongst other things iron) to be delivered at their station at
Doncaster, according to a certain specification. The defendant
sent in a tender, as follows :—
“I, the undersigned, hereby undertake to supply the Great
Northern Railway Company, for twelve months from the 1st of
November, 1871, to 31st of October, 1872, with such quantities
of each or any of the several articles named in the attached specifi
cation as the company’s store-keeper may order from time to time,
at the price set opposite each article respectively, and agree to
abide by the conditions stated on the other side.
(Signed) “ Samuel Witham.”
The company’s officer wrote in reply, as follows:—
“ Mr. S. Witham.
“ Sir,—I am instructed to inform you that my directors have
accepted your tender, dated, &c., to supply this company at Don
caster station any quantity they may order during the period
ending 31st of October, 1872, of the descriptions of iron men
tioned on the inclosed list, at the prices specified therein. The
terms of the contract must be strictly adhered to. Requesting
an acknowledgment of the receipt of this letter,
(Signed) “ S. Fitch, Assistant Secretary.”
To this the defendant replied,—“ I beg to own receipt of your
18 COURT OP COMMON PLEAS. [L. R.
1873 favor of 20th instant, accepting my tender for bars, for which
Great I am obliged. Your specifications shall receive my best attention.
Northern
Railway Co.
S. Witham.”
v. Several orders for iron were given by the company, which were
Witham.
from time to time duly executed by the defendant; but ultimately
the defendant refused to supply any more, whereupon this action
was brought.
A verdict having been found for the plaintiffs,
supply the goods. The case mainly relied on in support of that 1873
contention was Burton v. Great Northern Bailway Co. (1) But that Great
is not an authority in the defendant’s favor. It was the converse R^^yf^Co.
case. The Court there
. .
held that no action would lie against
° .
the W
_ itham
v .
company for not giving an order. If before the order was given
the defendant had given notice to the company that he would not
perform the agreement, it might be that he would have been justi
fied in so doing. But here the company had given the order, and
had consequently done something which amounted to a considera
tion for the defendant’s promise. I see no ground for doubting
that the verdict for the plaintiffs ought to stand.
Attorneys for defendant: Jacobs, North, & Vincent, for North &
Sons, Leeds.