View report page

62
downstairs," and there is an interval of 45 minutes between the
arrival at the platform and the arrival at the van. The purchase
must have been complete at one place or the other, and the responsibility
for the purity of the milk during the 45 minutes' interval must
have rested upon the consignor or the consignee, according as the one
place or the other was held to be the place of delivery. The Lord
Chief Justice in his judgment says, "this was a contract by which the
property became the purchaser's and the purchase became complete
when the milk was delivered to the respondent at Wanstead Park."
Does that mean at the platform or at the van—both were at Wanstead
Park Station. If it means the respondent's van, it is exceedingly
unfortunate that his Lordship did not definitely state so, because Mrs.
Sadler's responsibility did not begin until the purchase was complete,
and from the time the milk reached the van it was under the care of
her own servants, who proved to the satisfaction of the Court that it
had not been tampered with. What happened during the 45 minutes'
interval would not in that case affect her. But if, as I am disposed to
think, his Lordship meant the place of delivery to be the platform, then
the contention of the appellant was correct and ought to have succeeded.
There is internal evidence in the judgment itself to support this
view. As stated above, had the van been the place of delivery there
would have been no need at all for the High Court to consider the
question of the possibility of the milk having been tampered with
after its arrival at the station, but before it came into the possession
of the respondent. The Lord Chief Justice, however, did review
this question as if it formed an essential part of the case to be
decided. He said "as to the argument that because the milk was
some time at Wanstead Park Station, the respondent ought to prove
that it was not tampered with there, the finding in paragraph (c) of
the case practically amounted to this, that Bell, though he had other
duties to perform, and it was not his duty to watch the churns the
whole time, practically did look after them, and did not allow them
to be tampere I with." How that conclusion can be derived from the
findings in paragraph (c) is wonderful, but far more strange when