R.M. COURT.

Marlborough Daily Times, Volume X, Issue 314, 5 May 1888, Page 2

R.M. COURT.

Friday, May 4. Before J. Allen, Esq,, R.M. CIVIL CASES. T. Smalc v T. Congdon, claim ot L2 6s for goods supplied.—Verdict by default for amount claimed, and 6s costs. A “ HORSEY” CASEt " " '

AV. H. Hamilton v T. Gettings, a claim of LlO, amount paid for a horso alleged to have been unsound. —Mr Sinclair appeared for plaintiff; Mr M‘Mab for defendant!

William H. Hamilton, the plaintiff, deposed that he bought a horse from defendant, the bargain being made on Sunday, March 5. The agreement was that if the horse did not suit plaintiff, defendant would return the money paid, LlO. Mr March, who was present at the time, recommended plaintiff to buy the horse. Witness said he would leave a cheque with Mr March. On taking the horse' away, witness noticed that it was a little lame, and next day w’ as so lame that it was unable to walk. Witness tome the horse to Mr Cresswell, blacksmith, and he said the lameness was pot caused through the Shoes ninchmg. Mr Crosswell run his hand cfown the horse's lorn, and it gave way. On seeing this, witness returned the horse to Mr March, and asked the latter to get the cheque back from defendant and return him the horse. Defendant offered witness LS in full satisfaction, but witness would not take less than L 9. To Mr Sinclair: Before I bought tho fforso defendant said it was sound and in good condition. I led it all the way to White’s Bay. To Mr M‘Nab : I did not, as far as I know, strain the horse while going over White’s Bay Hill. With the exception of being slightly lame, the horse was guaranteed sound. Several people in the Spring Greek district recommended the animal to me.

.John March stated that he was present when defendant took the horse away. With the exception of being slightly lame, it appeared in very good condition. Witness thought the lameness was caused through the shoes pinching. He was not

present when the bargain was made, but lie heard defendant say that ho would lake the her o buck again if it did not suit. When witness felt the loins the horse gave way. He did net see anything about tiie animal’s foot that would cause tho lameness. To Mr M'Nab: Defendant is a very respectable young man. and I have no reason whatever to doubt bis word, if ho says that tho horse was sound bofore he sold it.

Robert Cresswell, blacksmith, Spring Greek, stated that the horse had been shod about a fortnight. There was nothing about the hoof to cause lameness. Witness noticed that the horse was weak across the loins. Shoes might remain on a horse for two or three months, and even then not cause it to go lame.

To Mr M‘Nab : Never saw the horse before plaintiff brought it to me. Would not like to go over White’s Bay Hid, as the road is not an ordinary civilised one. Did not tliiuk that defendant desired to take Hamilton in.

l'etcr MTntyre, laborer, said he had ridden the horse some weeks previous to its being sold to Hamilton. Witness rode it about the Spring Creek district, and he thought it had been shod three or four weeks before tho sale. Witness noticed that tho animal was a hit lame when Hamilton took it away. He heard defendant say that he would refund the money if the horse did not suit.

To Mr M‘Nab: I ride 14st all. I have ridden the horse in question, hut he never went in the loins with me. He never went lame while I rode him.

Frank France, a laborer, Spring Greek, was also present when the horse was bought and sold. Witness recommended the horse because he thought it was a good one, and well worth tho money. He recommended plaintiff to buy it on condition that it was to he returned if it did not suit. lie paid no attention to the fact that it was lame, thinking that it might be caused by tho shoe pinching. Defendant did not seem very anxious to sell the horse. To Mr M‘Nab : Did not notice that the horse was gone in the loins. No mention of such a thing was made at the time of the bargain. Thomas Gettings, defendant, admitted selling the horse as alleged. People who had known the horse for some time recommended plaintiff to buy him. Witness refused to take the horse back from MiMarch because he was larno. There was no such lameness about the horse on Sunday as there was on Tuesday when he was asked to take him back. Witness paid .LlO for the horse, and had rode him several times. He rode him on the Sunday, but there was nothing wrong with it then. He sold the horse with the best of intentions. Witness agreed to refund plaintiff LB, but he would not take it.

Judgment was given for plaintiff for L 9, and L2 ISs costs, including expenses of three witnesses.

THE BIRCH HILL FLAX MILL

D. H. Pattie v. R. J. Paul, a claim of L6O, being L 5 for amount of damage to engine, L3O through defendant breaking his coutract, and L 25 through plaintiff having to enter into another contract for cartage, This ease had been adjourned from April 13th. Mr M'Nab appeared for plaintiff, and Mr Sinclair for defendant. The first witness called was

D. H. Pattie, the plaintiff, who said he had a flax mill at Birch Ilill. The first trouble ho had with defendant was when he (defendant) broke the engine on bringing it up to Birch Hill. Tim coal which left Blenheim on Monday, did not reach Birch Hill until Thursday, and there was no reason whatever for the delay. Witness had to enter into a new contract for carting, and it was costing him 5s per ton more. He reckoned that the profit on flax in Blenheim was Ll2 per ton. It cost JL4 to mend the damage done to tho engine.

To Mr Sinclair: Tho understanding was that the contract was to bo one of long duration, and so defendant took it at 5s per ton loss than ordinary price. Tiio engine was not to bo taken up safely “ bar accidents.” Witness did not consider he was guilty of negligence in allowing his supply of coal to run out. The coal should have been at the mill on Monday, and defendant laid to take it whenever witness told him. Witness was not aware that the waggon broke down shortly after leaving Ren wick, and defendant never told him that such was tho case.

James Storey stated that he was cutting flax in Wantwood Gully for Mr Battle. As far as witness knew', the quantity of dressed fibre that loft the mill while he was in the plaintiff’s employ was as follows: 37cwt, 74cwt, 4 tons Scwt, and 3 tons. Witness was employed cutting flax from February 3rd to April 14th. He and one or two others were the only ones engaged on the contract.

John Vorback, blacksmith, Renwicktown, said that ho saw the engine on its way up to Bircli Hill, It was on the river bed on tho other side of the stream. Witness mended it after it ms broken, the cost of same being L 5. It was an old engine, and seemed to have been broken several times—the wheels in particular. When ivitness mended it, the breakage was in the axle, which was not very strong. lie considered there was great risk in taking the engine across the river bed, The axle was broken in the solid part. There was a slight flaw in tho axle. The cause of tho break was that it had not been properly screwed up. Witness did not think L 6 enough to take the engine up to Birch Hill, and run tho risk as well. To Mr M‘Nab: Could not understand why Paul signed such a contract, but if lie did do so I suppose he must keep to his agreement. George Taylor, laborer, Spring Creek, stated that ho was in charge of the engine when it collapsed. They were three parts over the river bed when the break down occurred. The axle was not strong enough to bear the weight of the engine. When the axle broke they were going down a slight incline. Witness thought it would cost about LlB to form a road in the river bed fit to take the engine across: He was not a bit surprised when the en- j gine collapsed. I To Mr MiNab : Never heard Mr Fleming caution defendant. Ho simply showed gs the best road to take the engine. I never told defendant that it was too risky a matter to go down the incline, but I did think it was too steep to go down. Fleming and Paul had sqtno conversation I did not hear, but Paul did not tell me that Fleming had cautioned him. The place where the smash occurred was a pretty bad one. I myself pulled up at a much les3 steeper place than that at which the accident occurred. Robert John Paul, the defendant, said j that ho entered into an agreement with j plaintiff to take the engine up to Bircli j Hill—plaintiff to take all responsibility. Witness offered to convey tho engine to i the rnill and tako all responsibility for | DIO, but after arguing for some time with ! plaintiff, tliO ff/mior price of LA w&s j agreed upon. Before leaving Blenheim witness told plaintiff that he did not think j the engine would go across the river bed. I When the accident occurred, lie got Mr j Vorbach to mend the axle, and told him to put it down, to Pattic. Witness after- ; wards taw Mr Pattie in Blenheim, and the latter said it would lie all right. 1 When witness passed the remark about the engine breaking down, plaintiff said he hoped it would net break down. There ; was a slight incline where the breakage) , i occurred. Witness only got written ■ , notice about the coal on Friday, night, but ho had always boon in tho habit of

getting a week's notice from the Loan Company “for a load. The man started for the mill on Tuesday from Renwick, hut the shafts of the dray broke and caused a delay. The man was due at the mill on Wednesday, hut ho told witness that he was delayed on account of the rain.

To Mr M'Nab: I had no goods for other people along with the load of coal, and I did not refuse to take a larger load. D. 11. Pattie, re-called, slated that at the time mentioned by the witness .Storey, five weeks the mill did not work, leaving only five weeks during which flax was put out. The weather when the delay in the^ delivery of the coal occurred was fine, as far as. witness knew. Defendant had refused on each separate occasion to take more coil, owing to his load being made up with other people’s goods. Witness considered the agreement a fair one, and it was read over to defendant in the presence of Messrs Burleyman and M'Kenzie. The word “ safely ” was in the agreement.

To Mr Sinclair: Since tho date of the dispute, I have dismissed my late manager, as I was dissatisfied with him.

After counsel had addressed the bench, His Worship said he would give judgment on Friday next. There were one or two points ho wanted to look up in tho meantime.