THE BARON O' BUCHLYVIE.

Otago Witness, Issue 3018, 17 January 1912, Page 18

THE BARON O' BUCHLYVIE.

This famous Clydesdale horse has earned a lasting name and reputation, not only in show-yard lore, where for many years some good judges thought he had remarkably hard luck, but also in the legal records of the highest court in the realm. Tho dispute concerning his ownership has run a course very similar to his show-yard career. A few days ago the keenly-fought contest bctwoan Mr Kilpatrick and Mr Dunlop for tho ownership of the horse was debated before the House of Lords by counsel of most outstanding eminence, and that grave and most learned legal tribunal has unanimously pronounced in favour of Mr Kilpatrick's contention that he and Mr Dunlop are still joint-owners of the horse, and Mr Dunlop will require to account for the drawings from the Baron for the past seven years. Mr Kilpatrick has also been awarded his expenses, and these cannot be far short of three times, the original price paid to Mr M'Kcich, the breeder of the horse.

This, in many respects, lias been a most remarkable litigation. Two neighbours, Mr Kilpatrick and Mi> Dunlop, admittedly bought, him on joint account in the summer of 1902. By arrangement Jic was delivered to Mr Kilpatrick, who, so. far as the public wera concerned. wa.s represented to be hi s sole owned, hnrl ho stood a* his farm till December 1903. In that month Mr Dunlop alleged that he. conceived the idea of becoming solo owner. With that object, in his mind he repaired to a meeting of tho farmers' Society in Kilmarnock, where he hoped to meet Mr Kilpatrick; and evidently his hopes were realised. The recorded evidence shows at this meeting he offered Mr Kilpatrick £2OOO as his "valuation" of the Baron, and this figure was nccepted by Mr Kilpatrick. Following on this meeting and disputed bargain, the horse was sent, to Mr Dunlop's farm of Dunure Mains about the middle of December, 1903, and on the 29th of that month the parties met in Ayr, when Mr Kilpatrick stated that it was discovered that, a fatal misunderstanding had arisen regarding the price to be paid by Mr Dunlop. He understood that he was

to receive £2OOO as his share of tho horse, while Mr Dunlop represented that £2OOO was the full value of the animal, and that as he was .joint-owner, he had only £IOOO to pay to Mr Kilpatrick. This tleadlock led, according to Mr Kilpatrick's story, to an entire departure from tho proposed sale; but as the horse had meantime, under an erroneous idea, gone to Dunure Mains, in order presumably to keep down gossip about him, he resolved just to allow him to stand there, and be rnanasred in Mr Dunlop's name, in the same way as he had previously been managed by Mr Kilpatrick. All this seems quite free from difficulty ; but trouble was lurking in the background, which, however, did not manifest itself openly until the autumn of 1908. At tha't timo Mr Kilpatrick asked Mr Dunlop to account for the revenue drawn for the years 1905, 1906, 1907, and 1909, of which no share had been paid to him. Mr Dunlop's reply was that Mr Kilpatrick had sold the horse to him, and that ho had paid tho price. This, Mr Kilpatrick emphatically denied, and at once appealed to Caesar. The case ran its usual protracted course in the Scottish courts, and after a proof, Lord Skerrington decided in Mr Kilpatrick's favour, and ordered Mr Dunlop to account. This judgment, was carried on appeal to the Second Division of the Inner House of tho Court of Session, and that court reversed Lord Skerrington's judgment and declared Mr Dunlop sole owner. Now the House of Lovds has reversed the Inner House judgment and given its decision entirely in favour of Mr Kilpatrick. So the Baron still remains the joint property of these two doughty litigants. It is an instructive commentary on the glorous uncertainty of the law, but a costly lesson as to the importance of doing business in a business fashion. Mr Dunlop said ho kept no current account with any bank, but carried his bank practically in tho shape of pound note.? in his pocket. Had ho observed even the most elementary principles of business, this unfortunate litigation would never have arisen, and the public would never have known how loosely somo men conduct very largo business transactions. It is an expensive experiment to have a valuable Clydesdale stallion put through his paces in the House of Lords, with an audience of distinguished judges and equally distinguished counsel and agents. —North British Agriculturist.