Good Roads Machinery Co. v. Union Township

Citations

• 34 Pa. Super. 538
• 1907 Pa. Super. LEXIS 178

Syllabus

<p>Townships — Supervisors—Contract—■Evidence.</p> <p>In an action against a township to recover the price of a rock crusher sold under a warranty that it would do certain work specified, evidence to the effect that one of the two supervisors who bought the machine was “satisfied to accept and settle for it” is immaterial and irrelevant, inasmuch as the acceptance by one supervisor without the concurrence of the other will not bind the township. In such a case the only question is whether the machine did the work it was warranted to do.</p> <p>The two supervisors of a township signed a written contract for the purchase of a stone crusher. In an action against the township to recover the purchase money, one of the supervisors testified that before the contract was signed, the plaintiff’s agent, in reply to his inquiry. said that an eight-horse power engine would do to run the machine. At a test made after the delivery of the machine it was found that an eight-horse power engine would run it, but not perhaps to the limit of its efficiency. The witness was asked whether or not he would have signed the contract or any other contract for a stone crusher, if the agent had not made that statement. The supervisor thus testifying was not. satisfied that the machine came up to the requirements of the warranty given at its sale. After his term of office had expired, a second test was made to the satisfaction of the other supervisor who had been a party to the purchase of the machine. Held, that it was error to permit the supervisor to testify that he would not have signed the contract if the agent had not made the statement in question.</p> <p>If all the supervisors of a township meet and consult together in reference to the purchase of a road machine, and then join in a contract for the purchase of the machine, the vendor of the machine is not bound to show affirmatively that the supervisors did their full duty. If there be no fraud or collusion, and no conduct on his part by