CREDIT TO CLUBS.
The Law Times of a recent date has the following i— I The. decision delivered last wrek in Steele v. Gourley, though on a pure question of fact, is yet an important one to a large number of persons, for on the facts the defendants were in. a very similar position towards the plaintiff to that which most active members of club committees occupy towards club tradesmen. In this, as well as in the other action which depended on it, the plaintiff had supplied goods for the use of a club in consequence of a letter from the club solicitor, requesting him to supply goods on a weekly account, de livering his bill to the kitchen clerk. In the second of the two cases, Overton v. Hewitt, the plaintiff had admitted, in cross examination, that he gave credit to the club, and on this answer the fate of the two cases in the Divisional Court to a large extent turned, after a lengthy dis cussion of the question whether the effect of it was that the plaintiff purported to contract with “ the club ’’ as aq indivi dual entity, or with the members of the club severally. The foundation of this somewhat strained distinction was sup plied by a judgment of a Lord Justice Thesiger in an unreportod case. Tho Court of Appeal, however, gave the go-by to the whole argument. Tho defendants

SOUTH CANTERBURY TIMES. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 15. 1887.
