A RUNAWAY HORSE.

Taranaki Herald, Volume LIV, Issue 13746, 8 September 1908, Page 2

A RUNAWAY HORSE.

CLAIM FOR DAMAGES.

The question of what constitutes attendance on a horse standing on a street was very much debated in the Magistrate's Court this morning before Mr H. S. Fitzherbert, S.M. Mrs Marian Elizabeth Hodgson sued Francis George Scrivener, storekeeper, New Plymouth, for £33 for general and special damages for injuries and damage to clothing received through defendant's runaway horse and trap colliding with plaintiff on August 13 2 1907. Mr Weston appeared for plaintiff, and MiFrank Wilson for defendant. • The circumstances of the case were recounted a fortnight ago, when Mrs Hodgson unsuccessfully sued O. W. Solo, who had assisted in driving the cattle which started Scrivener's horse, for a similar amount. Briefly, the iacts Avero that on the date mentioned defendant's horse and cart were standing outside his shop at the corner of Watson and Devon Streets. Defendant had been loading it with goods to be taken round to his customers. A refractory cow startled the horse, which bolted, and knocked down and injured the plaintiff. Tho questions on which the case hinged were (1) whether defendant had been guilty of negligence, and (2) what constituted negligence in the circumstances. Plaintiff deposed that the horse and cart were unattended. Her counsel also cited the borough by-laws, which provided that any person in charge of a horse or vehicle who left it so as not to be able to have sufficient control over it was guilty of an offence. Law cases were cited in support of the contention for plaintiff that defendant did not have control over the animal, and was* therefore guilty of negligence. On the other hand, Mr Wilson called evidence to show that when the horse bolted Scrivener was standing on the pavement a foot away from the step of the cart, preparing to get into it. The animal bolted with such suddenness that he was unable to check it. So that, contended counsel, the animal was not unattended.

The Magistrate also cited two cases decided in English law courts having much bearing on the present case. In one of these it was shown that a porter was going backwards and forwards from a vehicle loading it with goods, when the horse bolted. In the other case a cabdriver had just left his cab to put away some, forage when the runaway occurred. In both cases it wm held that there was no negligence on the part of the porter and cabdriver.

His Worship held that plaintiff in tho present case had not shown that Scrivener was guilty of carelessness, and nonsuited her, but without costs.