MILTON MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 12068, 14 December 1903, Page 2

MILTON MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Friday, December 11. (Before Mr George Cruicksliank, SAT.) —Civil Cases.— Robert Moore v. W. J. Jones.—Claim, £4275, goods supplied. Mr Thomson appeared for plaintiff, whose books had been burned at a recent fire.—The defendant denied rereiving a statement, or having agreed to pay. —Plaintiff was nonsuited. George Reed, jun. v. John W. Finch.— Claim, £l2 10s, being £l2 for a horse sold to defendant and four weeks’ grazing at 2s 6d per week. Mr Thomson appeared for the plaintiff and Mr D. Reid for the defendant.— Mr Thomson submitted the case as follows On the night of the sth November last defendant went to plaintiff’s livery stable and wanted to buy a quiet horse. Plaintiff showed him two horses, one at £lB and another at £l2. Defendant then said the £lB horse was too much, but he would like a trial of the other one, whereupon plaintiff put the horse in a buggy Sad drove round the town, after which defendant said he was satisfied with the horse, and suggested that they should go to an agent to “ square up ” the money. This they agreed upon, and went to Messrs Donald Reid and Co., who took the matter in hand. Defendant then took delivery of the horse, and he alleges that on the following Saturday night he yoked up to go to Milton station, but the animal jibbed, and would not go. After some coaxing he got it to the station and track home. The next day defendant’s father went to the agents, and told - " them not to pay the money. Defendant took the horse hack to plaintiff’s stable on Friday, 12th November, and as no person was about left it there. Plaintiff, on seeing the horse there, asked defendant the reason why it was brought back, and upon receiving a reply that the horse would not go. he wrote to defendant that the horse would bo at his risk in his stable. Defendant now refused to take the animal away. The defendant had kept the horse for over a week, although he alleges that it jibbed the night after he purchased it.—George Reed, jun., plaintiff, gave evidence that to his knowledge the horse never jibbed, and he had run continuously in the livery stable for three years, being hired out to the public. Ho guaranteed the animal as being quiet.—Evidence for plaintiff as to the good quality of the horse was given by James Reed and A. Campbell and R. M'Kinnon. as agent for Donald Reid and Co,—Mr Reid said that defendant had asked for a quiet horse, and _ thought at the time that he said he was satisfied with it, that it would answer the purpose he bought it for—viz., for his mother to drive about with. Defendant ad-inii-ted getting a satisfactory trial, but as he had horses of his own that would not go in harness he did not- want this animal on his (lands. Defendant notified plaintiff the night that the home jibbed, but he (plaintiff) would not believe him.—Defendant gave evidence as 70 the jibbing qualities of the horse, and corroboration was supplied by W. Finch, Mrs and J. M'Grouthcrr.—Mr Thomson ' • n ed out the fact that defendant did not x-übie to bring in outside witnesses. He oniy called those who were his relatives.—Mr I’v-'-d contended that plaintiff should be nouIritod', and after pressing on points of law rhs Worship reserved his decision. D. Gordon v. J. Harker.—Claim, £1 15s, being money due to him over sale of horse. Mr Reid for plaintiff, and Mr Thomson depended.—After evidence of Mary Ann Gordon, judgment was given for plaintiff for the full amount, and costs (£1 19s), —Criminal Case.— Thomas Kilgariff and his son Michael Kilgariff were charged with brutally assaulting Robert- Palmer on November 10. Mr Thomson appeared for complainant, and Mr Reid defended.—Robert Palmer, a blacksmith, residing about two miles from Milton, stated that on the day in question defendant Thomas Kilgariff was driving four dairy cows to his paddock. On the way he had to pass plaintiff’s house, and the cows started eating his rosebush fence, whereupon he (plaintiff) went out and chased thd cattle away. He then had hot words with the father about the cows grazing on the road, and after some menacing threats the son ruslied out and struck plaintiff, injuring a rib, and badly bruising his head.—Dr Meuzies gave evidence as to dressing the wounds, saying that there were no very serious injuries. —Mr Reid contended that the case should be dismissed, as plaintiff was a man who took a. pride in annoying the whole of the neighborhood, and had brought this on himself. The defendant Thomas Kilgariff was an old man, and very feebie. Palmer was a big strong blacksmith, and therefore tried to take advantage of the old man by ordering him to put up Ins fight. The younger defendant then left Iris work, about three chains away, and, thinking his father wits going to be assaulted, went over and took a large branch of an apple tree out of Palmer’s hand, and struck him with his fists.—After evidence was given by the defendants, His Worship held that Palmer had been the cause of the trouble and ho dismissed the information. —By-law Case,— William Groves was fined ss, and 7s costs, for allowing two horses to wander in the borough, upon the information of Inspector Anderton.