MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume VI, Issue 271, 1 November 1916, Page 7

MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

OVER A HORSE AND GIG. I INTERPRETER’S SERVICES ! DELAYED. | I Tutu proceeded against the H.B. I Motor Company for a sum of £l5 , 10 -, being alleged amount of dam- > age to a horse and sundry other damages. Mr. Duff appeared for plaintiff and Mr.' Currie for defendant company. In opening the case Mr. Duff said that the plaintiff stabled his horse and gig at the Motor Company’s stables, paving the usual fee of 1/--When he returned for them they ■Cb’uld not be found, and he was not treated with much- civility. The; horse was subsequently found wanderiim in an exhausted condition on the Taradale road. The gig and - harness were returned to the stables | a day or two after. Plaintiff had - lost three days’ work, and as the horse had suffered _ considerably, he considered the claim very’ reason- 1 able. 1 At this stage Mr. Duff intimated that he had been unable to obtain • the services of an interpreter, and i as the plaintiff was not well ac- . quainted with English, he asked - that his Worship be patient with | him. . I His Worship stated that it was a ! little trying for the Bench, so Counsel immediately left in search of an I interpreter, returning after about 20 minutes, closely followed by the ; essential man. ! In his story, Isaac Tutu, said i that when he went at night to get his turn-out. an old man helped to look for it, but it was gone. Next morning he returned and met Mr. Harvey, who said that- some of the defendant’s friends had taken them ’but he replied that he badn.t friends who would do such a thing. He hen communicated with the Police Sergeant. Next day the horse was ! ound in a paddock near Onepoto Gullv. in an exhausted state, as if t had been ill-used. The night had been extremely cold. He went to the stables next day and found the gig and harness. A parcel containing a motor suit, cabbage and onions, which was in the gig on the first night was missing and had not been heard of since. When he asked where the gig had been returned from, he .was told to “go and ask Dolan!” Prior to this his horse was worth £4O, but it was now in such a weak state that he was afraid to put it in harness. To Mr. Currie: His horse’s name was “Te Aroha/’ and he had it from it’s birth. It is a chestnut half draft and now nine years old. It is now worth about £4O. Mr. Currie: Why are you onlyclaiming £5 now 1 Witness: To let you people down lightly. Mr. Currie: We’re much obliged (laughter.} ... Continuing witness said it was suffering from the nose, but he did not look to see if the legs were swollen. He had come into town on the first day in connection with some Land Court business. He always left his gig at the Motor Co’s stables, but didn’t always ask for a receipt. Mr. Currie : Aren’t vou riding this horse at present with only three shoes on ? Witness: I was not aware of that.

Mr. Currie ; How much money did I you spend when searching for the horse and gig. Witness : Didn’t keep count, £1 or £2, sometimes in the train, other times in a car. .Simon Tutu, brother of plaintiff, stated that the horse was very mucn knocked about. He considered it’s worth at about £4O. He brought it from Taradale to Onepoto. Mr. Currie : How did you bring it in—lead it_with a halter ? Witness : No, I used a bit of fencing wire (laughter.) Similar evidence as to the value of the horse was given by Sam Tutu. In opening the case for the defence, Mr. Currie said there was no negligence on the part of the H.B. Motor Co., with regard to the present case. The Maoris were allowed to go and procure their ; horses at any time. j His Worship here stated that the I point to be found out, was, if there was any neglect on the part of the , Company. , John Thomas Harvey, manager of ( the H.B. Motor Company, deposed that he knew the horse in question. It was described by witness as a ' spring cart horse valued at about j £l5. He considered the horse was 1 treated the same as all Maori horses ; —drive him hard fill day and turn j him out at night. I Witness here asked if he could exi plain how it all came round, but on ' Mr. Duff’s objection, Mr. Currie re- ! marked ‘‘My learned friend does not wish to be enlightened on the suhi ject.” I David Meyrick,, foreman of the i Motor Co’s stables, said he took ! charge of the horse and gig in ques- ! tion? the night it was brought in. ; There was no rule applying to pari eels left in the gig at the stables. ; When the night man earns on duty i he was not the worse for liquor. The 1 horse was unbrushed at all times. I In summing up the evidence His ■ Worship said that it appeared that ; defendant was liable to a certain j extent. No evidence had been ■ called for the defence as to how and | when the trap was taken away. The ‘ onus of proof as regards the loss of 1 the chatill fell on the defendant. He considered that the amount claimed Was far in excess. His Worship subsequently entered judgment for plaintiff for £2 damages, with costs amounting to 1 £6 8/6.