MOTOR v DOG.

Feilding Star, Volume IV, Issue 1130, 10 March 1910, Page 2

MOTOR v DOG.

HARD ON THE DOG.

CASE BEFORE THE COURT.

At the BUI. Court to-day, before Mr A. D. Thomson, S.M., C. H. West (Mr Prior) sought to recover from C. J. Adams (Mr Graham) the sum of £15, value of a sheep dog which had been run over and killed by a motor ear. Plaintiff deposed on oath that the aog which was killed was a leading and heading dog. good all round, could be trusted all day with the sneen, six years old. It was impossible to value the dog, but witness had refused to take £20 for him. On February 6, be was returning from Oolyton to Feilding, and between Hitchmairs corner and the bridge. the car ran over the dog. Witness was two chains -above the'dip on the i upper side of the bridge, and directly he saw the lights of the car he called Ins dogs m. The glare of the lamps caused witness' horse to shy right off the road on to the grass on the side. Ihe car was close on witness' side of the road ,and if it had been on its proper side it would have been on the opposite side of the road. Witness beard a bang and two howls, went to see what had happened, and found his dog under the car. Witness told 'Adams, the driver of the car, he had killed hie (witness , ) dog, and Adams replied that he would pay for it. The (log was not dead, and witness took : t home and tried to fix it up, but he linally had to kill him. At the time oi the occurrence Adams said it was an accident, and a, few days afterwards he again said it was" an accident. Adams neither blew the horn nor slowed down. Witness' dog would not rush at anything—witness would not own a dog which would do such a thing. His dog was not likely to rush at four glaring lights. The dog was a most valuable possession for him as a drover. Even if Adams had been in the middle of the road, the dog would have escaped. To Mr Graham: The occurrence took place opposite Smith's house. When witness called his dogs, they went behind his horse. 'One dog came from his right, and one from the left. He saw his dog crossing the road to him when the car was more than a chain away. Continuing to Mr Graham, witness said there were no bullrushes on the right hand side coming down. When Adams came up in the car, he came straight up, hugging the right hand side of the road. The car had pased witness when he struck the dog. Adams was by himself in the car, and did not get out. Witness thought the dog pulled the car up. Witness said to Adams, "You've killed niv dog!-' 'Adams replied. "I will pay tor it." Witness thought it was "lory' , which had been killed, but he lound afterwards it was "Tweed/ - When witness found "Tory" was not hurt, lie told Adams, who said he was γ-er" pleased, and drove on. Witness then found it was "Tweed" which had been injured. The. Court then adjourned till 2 o clock.