KEEP OF BOXING BARONET’S HUNTERS.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17759, 1 February 1926, Page 3

KEEP OF BOXING BARONET’S HUNTERS.

BUSINESS HABITS OF UNDERGRADS. The unbusiness like habits of undergraduates were commented on during the hearing of an action brought in the' Official Referee's Court, before Sir Francis Newbolt, by Messrs Hopkins and Co., livery stable keepers at Cambridge, against Sir John Milbanke, the boxing baronet, claiming payment for the keep of horses. Judgment was given against Sir John. Mr Merlin for the plaintiffs, said that Messrs Hopkins were livery stable keepers at Cambridge, where Sir John was at all the material times an undergraduate. The claim was for a balance owing in respect of eight or nine hunters and polo ponies kept for him. There had been continuous dealings between Sir John and Messrs Hopkins from 1921 to 1925. and now. for the first time. Sir John made the suggestion that the charges were excessive. Mr Edward J. Hopkins, of the plaintiff company, was asked, in cross-exam-ination bv Mr Thorne Drury, K.C., for Sir John: Do you find your undergraduate customers in the habit of checking and challenging your charges?—A great many of them do. Mr Drury: Then they must have changed since my time (Laughter.) Sir Francis Newbolt: T don't know. Were you at Cambridge? Mr Drury: Xo. I was at the other shop. (Laughter.) Mr Thorne Drury submitted that the charges were grossly unfair and exSir Francis Xewbolt: An undergraduate goes up to Cambridge and buys a suit of clothes for ten guineas, lie does not know and does not inquire the price. He comes back to London and sees the same suit in Mr Mallafcy Deeleys window for six guineas. Can he dispute the charge of ten guineas because it is beyond doubt an extravagant charge as compared with the sjx guineas? I cannot see the legal side of it. What right has he to ask me to make a contract for him at a price slightly less than he actually paid? Mr Drury said Sir John Milbanke was no more businesslike than the rest ~{ the young men who went up to v ambridge. Sir Francis Xewbolt: The polo-play-ing class are less careful of expenses than you and 1 used to be. (Laughter.) Giving judgment, he said that however careless undergraduates were the law remained the same. “ 1 remain passive,” he continued, “ when an appeal is made to me on behalf of any litigant who has brought upon himself some loss or expenses by gross carelessness and the absence of ordinary business methods. The test I have to apply is precisely the same in considering the keep of a horse, whether the customer is an accountant in the City of London or an undergraduate in the University of Cambridge. He had had experience of University life, said Sir Francis, and had often groaned at the high prices charged by tradesmen. Tn his early youth he had considered it an outrage that he should be charged 50 per cent more than he paid in London, but still, he either paid or went “ on tick.” < Laughter.) In this case. Sir John, a man of unimpeachable character, for whom one would like to do anything in reason, took horses to these livery stables and asked the owner to take care of them

at some remuneration, lie (the Referee) was asked to assume that Sir John did not know what he had been paying before, and did not contract for the usual prices. What he was supposed to have said in contractual language was: “If you will take care of my ponies I will pay you what the Official Referee considers a reasonable price.” (Laughter.) But Sir John continued to send his horses there because it was the fashionable and proper thing to do, and he knew that his horses would be properly looked after. lie did not know what Sir John’s means were, but he assumed that he had means, and that it was not convenient for him to pay £BOO for the three years for the keeping of his horses. Sir Francis said he rejected the suggestion that he must strain the law in favour of a very careless and unbusinesslike class, lie was frankly tempted to do the'best he could for any young man in difficulty who showed a proper sense of his responsibilities and a desire to pay his debts. lie came to the conclusion that there was nothing whatever to show that the prices charged were unreasonable in the circumstances. and the remainder of the money must be paid. Judgment was accordingly entered for Messrs Hopkins with costs.