RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3051, 6 April 1881, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 6

(Before H. Eyre Kenny, Esq., 8.M.) BBEACH OP RAILWAY REGULATIONS. John Mclvor was charged, on the information of Constable Lawless, with attempting to enter a railway traia whilst the train was in motion. The constable gave evidence that the prisoner was tbe worse for liquor at the time the offence was committed, and that he missed the step of the carriage, aud fell between the train and platform. His Worship fined the prisoner 5s and costs. WILSON V. MONTIETH AND CO. Mr Lee addressed the bench for the defence, and contended that the contract must have teen made on the day the money was paid. There was evidence of a contract or a receipt having been written, but it had not been produced and the fact of its not being produced must be taken as against the plaintiff's case. His Worship sai<J there was no reference to a written document on his notes, and desired evidence on the subject.

Mr Wilson was then put in the box, and said, as near as he could remember, the receipt was worded as follows—" Received from Mr H. C. Wilson the sum of £20 for a brown mare Brunette, four years old, by Kakapau out of a Riddlesworth mare."

Mr Lee contended that that was more than a receipt, as it gave the age and pedegree, and showed what was sold. There was nothing in the evidence to show that any statement that had been made in reference to the mare was false to the knowledge of defendants. No evidence had been given to show that the mare was was not sound at the time it was sold. Supposing Jones' evidence to be correct as to the state of the mare when he examined her, it did not follow that it was unsound at the time of the Bale. The evidence went to show that up to the time of the sale there was nothing wrong with tbe mare. There was plenty in the evidence of plaintiff himself to show what was the matter with the mare. The only evidence before the Court as to the state of the mare was that Mrs Wilson told her husband that the beast stumbled. There was no evidence of what journies had been taken, and how long they were. There was evidence to show the kind of treatment the mare had received from the time she came into plaintiff's band?. She was put into a loose box, a day or two after some children were teasing her in the yard, and then she jumps a fence on to loose stones in a way that made the plaintiff say he wondered she did'nt break her legs. This was the first treatment she met with. After this she was not rested, but there was evidence that she was ridden continually. There was quite sufficient evidence as to what was the matter with the mare. Cook saw it; Parker saw it, and the defendants saw that the foot was bad. At the auction Cook, who was a skilled person in horse matters, bought the mare for £12. Cook's long experience among horses enabled him to give quite as valuable an opinion as a veternary surgeon. Immediately after she was bought at auction the mare was shod, and there was evidence that she had been going well since. As to the treatment plaintiff bad received from defendants, there wan evidence that the plaintiff was continually bothering defendant*, and anybody's patience would have betu exhaubted

under the circumstances. Then as to the stumbling—a beast will stumble with one rider and not with another. Mrs Wileon was probably not a skilful horse woman, and defendants had told her to keep the mare up to tbe rein, and she wouldn't stumble. Parker, the farrier, had shod the mare just before the Clive races, and he said, after she was sold at auction, the frog was on the ground, and after she was shod again she went all right. Was it likely that the defendants, who were dealers of repute and standing, would guarantee an unsound horse as sound to a customer who was living in town, and who could expose such a transaction at any time. The defendants were as respectable in their profession as tbe plaintiff was in bis. The allegation was tbat tbey took plaintiff in, but the probabilities were altogether againt it. If the beast was lame, there was no one brought who saw it. Even Palmer gave no evidence as to that, and there was evidence tbat he bid up to £11 for it at the sale. On the question of soundness Cook's evidence was adverse to tbat of Jones. On the authority of Miles and others, thoroughpin was not unsoundness unless it interfered with the work of the animal. It was evident that it was the treatment the mare received which accounted for anything tbat was the matter with her. It was well known that ladies do not treat horses gently as a rule. The mare was bought to enable Mrs Wilson to take horse exercise, and she took it. It was clear that it was the condition of the shoes which caused any lameness there was.

Mr Lascelles then addressed the Court at considerable length for the plaintiff. His Worship, in giving judgment, said there was an implied warranty that the mare was fit for the work it was required to do. and judgment would be for the plaintiff with costs.