AN AMUSING CASE.

Evening Star, Issue 12882, 3 August 1906, Page 4

AN AMUSING CASE.

CLAIM FOR A DOG BITE. A torn pair of trousers and a bitten leg Were submitted to the inspection of the District Court Magistrate at Melbourne in tin action by Philip Whitlock, an elderly gardener of somewhat dramatic appearance, against George Brasher, for'£3 damages incurred through Brasher's dog attempting to make a meal out of the calf of Whitlock's leg. Whitlock presented the following statement of his claim:— G. Tye Keo's fee for three visita ... £1 U 6 Loss of four days ... „, ... ... 10 0 Tear in trousers Underpants ... .-....„._ 0 10 Bandages ... ~ ~ ... „. _ ~ 0 1 0 Cnrbo.ic oil ... ~. Ointment .„ .„ ... ~ ... _ Z". 0 1 0 Bread for poultice .„ .„ ... .J 0 010 Wood (lcwt) „ _ .„ .„ Total _ ... _ _£3 0 0 "What is the wood for?" asked Mr Dwycr P.M. . " For heating water to foment my leg " replied Whitlock. He explained that on the 13th ult, he went to 476 Albert street, East Melbourne, where a Mrs Proctor engaged bim to do some work. Brasher lived at this place, and had a dog, a mixture of setter and retriever. After he finished work this dog attacked him, and gripped his leg with such tenacity that be Could not beat it off Whitlock thereupon bared his leg, and the magistrates made a close inspection of the wound. Mr Sonenberg. for the defence, contended that the tear in the trousers did not correspond with the position of the wound; whereupon Whitlock explained thai when he worked ho did not weir braces, and he offered to undo his braces in court to show that the tear was in the proper place. •j^ o ' o u ,ted the magistrates, hur n t Z' Eee not »° so far as that." Judgment was given for plaintiff for £2 10s with £i 3s 6d costs.