Majority
Order, entered 'February 29, 1960, denying petitioner-appellant’s motion to stay arbitration, unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the respondent. The refusal of the buyer to make payment for the balance due on goods sold and delivered was a sufficient dispute authorizing arbitration within the provisions of the broad arbitration clause contained in the contract of sale. To the extent that Matter of Webster v. Van Allen ( 217 App. Div. 219 [4th Dept.]) seems to point to the contrary, the reasoning and conclusion in that case are not found persuasive. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Stevens and Eager, JJ. [ 23 Misc 2d 98 .]