WHO KILLED THE CAT?

NZ Truth, Issue 230, 20 November 1909, Page 7

WHO KILLED THE CAT?

Neighborly Amenities.

Was Gordon a Gorgon ?

The question was, "Who killed the cat," m the case m which Robert Gort don, engineman, was charged with cruelly ill-treating a cat ph October. 25/ at Duaedin. • : • " ' "-'- : Lawyer Hanlon brushed up his irongrey locks, and, with a loud voice,, said that Bob would not ill-use a cat if he were paid to do it. Sub-Inspector Phair adjusted his eyeglasses, and stated that "Rabby" did ijluse the cat. ' Magistrate Widdowson was releree. Sub-Inspector Phair said that Gordon, who lives at Anderson's Bay-road, last month set a trap on the dividing fence between his property and his neighbor's, Mr .Murie.'s, and a cat was caught m it . ai 6.30 p.m..; on .©ptober 25 r and jemain- ''',}»?„■ SUSPENDED ALL, WIGHT,; „; although Mr .Murie had written a -note to • .Gordon info rn iing- hi 111 °* the fact* tout no. notice had been- taken of it. ; ' Donald ■ Fraser^ Murie said he was a . warehousemaiii- and ; : defendant Gordon and -he. were -neighbors. On October .2s, .wit-? ness. saw. a cat m a trap on his iehce.Ik -was., hanging ;. by the foreleg about 2ft, from the ground. The trap . was fixed .to the. fence from .defendant's, side, Tins would be about; 6;30 p.m. Witness wrote ; a:note lo defendant, and his little girl attempted, to deliver it, but was sent back by. defendant's family, and ordered Off. .tho premises. The cat remained suspended during the whole night,, and, Jn the inorning, witness communicated „w ith, the S.P.O.A. and the police,,: , ' to Mr Hanloii : , His informing the. owner of Hhe trap finished his duty m the ipattef, although the cat was on his property. He did not consider it his duty to release., the cat. He; did no.t hear ; the, cat squealing during the night, and it was. none of his 'business, anyway- *£«■ was not friendly with Gordon; .It was not a fact 'that lie left ■.. . ..' „ , :'i ■■ THE CAT IN : . THE TRAP , • so r a's to' get ''Gordon into trouble. He would not be surprised if the Gordons were never informed of the cat's plight .at -all. > ■ . ..■■••' •■■ • ■Constable Young gave evidence as toy finding the cat suspended at 9*30 a.m. in' the morning. ' The trap was' suspended' from the ■: fence about :2ft.: from tne ground.: Witness released the cat, which was exhausted, and ! ,could hardly, mow. Its. leg was broken, and it had afterwards to be destroyed. Witness ' aitcrwards saw defendant, who explained that ho had been, annoyed by cats and weas^ els, and had-set the trap. He also said that en the 25th ult., he • saw the trap, and there was nothing; m it. On the following morning, about 6..30 a.m., he went dov/n to feed the fowls, but did not look at the trap. Defendant had said he had placed it on Murie's side of the fence, as the cats came from there. For the defence, Mr Hanlon considered there was no proof that defendant had cruelly ill-treated the cat, and, m conse-: quence, the case should be dismissed. Defendant had set the TRAP TO : CATCH CATS and weasels, which were a nuisance to him. Mr Murie's evidence .was prejudiced. Defendant, Robert Gordon, said that he was an engineman m the Hillside workshops, where he had been for 34 years. He and Murie were neighbors m Anderson's Bay-road. They did not speak, although their families did. He had been troubled with cats and weasels taking his fowls, and had set the trap for them. The trap had been set for a week before ;the cat goij m it. On the day m question, he was home from iO o'clock m the morning. He was cleaning the fowlrun and blocking up the fowls at 7 p,m. There was nothing m the trap at that time. He was certain,' because he fixedthe string. No one m his house got a note from Mr Murie, and witness never heard of any .child of Mr Murie's haying' called. On the following morning, he did not look at the trap, as he was m a hurry. He never knew a cat was m. the trap until the police came. . •/ • To the Sub-Inspector : He set the trap on Murie's side because the cats came from there. It was not because he had a grievance against Murie that he set the trap , there. He ; had not studied .the matter ; out, so that the cat would fall on Murie's side. He did not care how the cats were caught, so long as. . they were caught. He never thought of lengthening the string so that the cat would 1 , not remain suspended. Mr , Widdowson intimated that he would like time to consider his decision, anti would give judgment on the following Monday. On Monday, Mr Widdowson, S.M., gave his reserved judgment, and said that he had considered all the evidence and the cases bearing on the point, and ( the result was that he found that, to make defendant liable, he must be guilty of wilfulness, recklessness, or wantonness. In this , case, he could not hold that it came within the meaning of the Statute. Carelessness was not sufficient m law to make defendant liable; He would, therefore, dismiss the case. . : ;:'