Pullman herald. [volume] (Pullman, W.T. [Wash.]) 1888-1989, 1918-07-26
POUNDS, NOT SACKS,
GOVERN IN SALES OF GRAIN

Probate Judge Nelson of Moscow,
Idaho, has rendered a decision which
viii be OF interest to farmers and
warehousemen.
The question was raised in an ac-
tlon between MGrk p. Miller Co. as
plaintiff and Moscow Union Ware
house Co. and George Sievers, de-
PENDANTS, and J2ues Dye, who was
entered in the case on motion of de-
PENDANTS, and filed a complaint in
Intervention.
The facts in tie action are sub
stantially, in briei, IS follows: The
Mark p. Miller Milling company had
bought from Jares Dye TAO sacks of
club wheat which was stored in de
PENDANTS warehouse and which con-
atituted the greater portion OF spc-
cial pile Of wheat marked No. 7.
| Plaintiff presented to the manager of
| the defendant company the ware
house receipts, accompanied by an
orGer from Mr.. Dye, to deliver to Mr..
Miller upon surrender of the receipts
| 40 full sacks of wheat, claiming
under specific statement in the
| order that it was entitled to posses
sion Of said number of sacks, regard
less of any weight shown upon the
receipts, Defendant refused to de-
liver more than 400 sacks of wheat,
which number made the quantity of
wheat as stated on the receipts, until
| it was clearly established whether
| the owner or the buyer of the wheat
was entitled to what Warehousemen
| term the oyerrun. The defendants
| disclaimed any other interest in the
case. And in his complain in inter
yentiOn Mr.. Dye laid claim to and
asked that the court declare him the
owner of all the wheat, over and
above the 460 sacks delivered to the
plaintiff, remaining in his said spe-
cial pile in the warehouse of the de-
PENDANT.
Judge Nelson gave his decision in
favor of Mir. Dye and against the
Mark P Miller Milling company and
dismissed the action as to the defend
ants
In giving his decision Judge Mel
son stated: The issue raised by the
pleadings and made clear by the tes
timony was, did Mr. Miller buy and
did Mr., Dye sell 470 bags of grain
or a certain quantity of grain from
a special pile Marked No. 7? Plain
tiff Miller based his right and con-
tention upon an order signed by Mr.
Dye, disregarding the weight shown
by the warehouse receipts and claim
ing the 470 sacks of wheat. From
the testimo ny it appeared to be the
/ general custom that, whenever ware
house receipts were sold, the purchas-
cr took whatever those receipts
called for in weight and nothing
more. But it is contended that there
is an order specifically stating that
Mr.. Miller was to have 470 sacks OF
wheat and to take any weight that
= may be in that number of bags. Ii
so, can any such order be effective
and enforced? The court holds that
such order is impossible of execution
: and compliance with. To hold that
' the order was proper and binding
, would necessitate the delivery of the
: identical sacks named in the ware
house receipts, which is admittedly
+ impossible, and if the sacks named
can the owner of a special pile OF
y grain direct the delivery of certain
number of sacks from any and all
p parts of such pile? If this latter
proposition is agreed to, special
@ pile of grain is nothing more nor
: less than a mass of grain, the sale OF
, any part of which can be determined
O by the weight only. And it seems
y that it would be unnecessary to sur
l. render any receipts, or call for the
surrender of any warehouse receipts
or issue any order for such surrend-
er, were the number of sacks the
q basis Of negotiation for sale. such
r method appears to the court to be
= dangerous. unjust, uncertain and
r speculative"
'. Plaintiff was represented at the