MAGISTERIAL.

Timaru Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 4560, 8 June 1889, Page 4

MAGISTERIAL.

TlMAßU— Fbidat, Junb 7, 1859. (Beforo C. A. Wray, Heq , R. M. JTTVENILE CEIMK. | James Auld, 10 years, and William Auld, 11 years, were charged with breaking into the house of Thomas Clark of Saltwater Creek, on the 6th, and stealing therefrom 15a m Bilver, a gold finger ring, a gold scarf pin, a wooden pipe, and a pocket knife. As tho lads had only just been arrested a remand was asked for. They were remanded till to-day, and the gaoler was directed to keep them separate from other prisoners. A BAD HUSBAXD AKD FATHER. Robert. Owens of Timaru, was charged on the information of his wife, Elizabeth Owens, with wilfully failing to provide her and their five children, with adequate means of support. This caau was adjourned for seven days. PEOHIBITION O3DER. On the information of Sergeant Livingstone, defendant consenting, a prohtbitioa order waa issued against the supply of spirituous liquors to Neil Marquis, to apply to the Timaru and Levels Licensing districts for twelve months. A BT-LAW CA3B. Jaa. Cccbrane, for leaving a vehicle and horses unattended m a street of the borough, was fined ss. THE FACTOBIHB ACTS. Four persons were charged by the Tnspcc tor under tho Employment of Females and Others A els (Sergeant Livingstone) with unlawfully employingyoung persons and females m their factories, on the afternoon of Thursday May 30th, Thursday being the day appointed a holiday by public notification of the Borough Conncil m place of Saturday. These were C. Atkinson (Woollen Factory), three females j P. W. Hutton, bookseller, and ■ bookbinder etc, one female ;S. Anderson, Boot Factory, two boys and fivo females ; ami C Kelly, tailor, five females. Mr Anderson asked for an adjournment for three weeks, as he waa approaching the Borough Council on the subject of the holiday and the adjournment being granted m this case, the other defendants also asked for ami ware allowed a similar adjournment. His Worship told the defendants, that whatever might be the result of their appeal to tie Borough Council they must respect the law as it stands m the meantime. CIVIL CASE. Davidson v. Edgeworth, claim £47, general and special damages for injuries sustained by plaintiff through being kicked by a horse m charge of defendant, at tho Timaru show grounds m October last. The c'aim was made up as follows : — General damages, £10; 16 week* loss of employment at 30s, £24 ; coit of maintenance and attendance at the hospital, £3; other medical expenses, £4; travelling expenses attending hospital. £1 ; total £47. Mr Hay for plaintiff, Mr White for defendant. ' Hia Worship gave judgment m this case as follows : — The plaintiff and defendant m this action were at the Timaru t'how on the 31st October last, the former m charge of two mares, and the latter leading an entire horse, and were waiting to leave the ground at 4 p.m. It was Bhown at tho trial that the plaintiff waa near the gate and that when it was opened by the gatekeeper he proceeded to go out m charge of his two mares, he being the first m a line, a number of others being behind ready to go ont m their turn. The defendant was not m this line, but was away from the gate m a different part of tho ground with his entire horse, and instead of waiting till the marei had gone out he led his entire forward (regardless of the gatekeeper, who called to him several times to go back), and attempted to go out at the gate, and m front of plaintiff , and his mares. In going through the gateway the defendant's horse kicked the plaintiff, and caused the injuries now sued for. It *as Bhown that it was n dangerous thing to bring an entire m front of mares m a gateway, and that it is customary on occasions of this kind to let the mares g > out first ; that m this instance there was no room at (he gateway but what defendant forced for himself. An experienced man must have known the risk he was ruuning and should certainly have paid attention to tl-e gatekeeper, who spoke loud enough, and waa heard to give him warning by others, and presumably by the defendant. Th 3 defendant then m hia eagerness to leave the snow ground, leading an entire amongst xnares and horses, acted m a rash and imprudent manner, and must be held liable for damages. No contributory negligence by the plaintiff wae proved. In considering the question of damages, however, the conduct of the plaintiff after the accident has to be considered. If he was imprudent and thereby retarded his own recovery, that must go m reduction of damages, and I think the medical and other testimony shows th»t m going to the Oatnaru show, and m not allowing himself perfect rest prescribed by I>r Hayes, his illneas and consequent incapacity to work were considerably aggravated Dr Hayes describes him as an unmanageable patient throughout, and says rliat it took a wick to pat his knee m, and that six weeks farther rest should have made the kne« as right as ever, with proper care. I assets the damages as follows : —Seven week" loss of time at 30s, £10 10s ; medical attendance, £3; hospital. £8; other damages, £1; total £22 10s ; for which [ give judgment fur plaintiff with coats.