RACING PACER

Auckland Star, Volume LXXIII, Issue 119, 22 May 1942, Page 6

RACING PACER

OPTION TO PURCHASE

SUBJECT OF COURT CLAIM

The Supreme Court action William E. S. McKay (Mr. R. S. Burt) V. Clarence L. Hill, coach builder (Mr. \V. S. Spence), in respect to the trotting horse Tumble was continued before Mr. Justice Callan and a jury of four in the Supreme Court today. Mr. Burt intimated that plaintiff would proceed in an action for £500 as for breach of contract to sell.

Plaintiff alleged that the horse was leased to him for three years on August 1, 1938, with option to purchase at £75, and that when he sought to exercise his option the defendant avoided completing the sale.

Plaintiff said that the horse was in poor condition when leased to him and was got into good condition and raced with moderate success. Just before the lease was up witness and a friend called at Hill's on July 27 to exercise the option of purchasing the horse. Defendant at the time said he must make the sale to plaintiff himself, not his friend, so they left. Plaintiff called at defendant's place at various times, with others, on July 30 and July 31, but could not find Hill at home. So he eventually deposited the purchase price with the president of the Trotting Club on behalf of Hill. He left a note under Hill's door on July 31 to that effect. He said that owing to the question of ownership he could not race the horse at two meetings then imminent, when the horse was ready and would have won two good stakes. A trial made after Julv 31 showed that the horse would probably have won two races. Cross-examined, witness admitted owing money to some trainers. He telephoned Mr. E. C. Bridgens, president of the Trotting Club, who agreed to accept the money on Hill's behalf. That was on July 31, the last day of the option. He then left a note *under Hill's door, saying the money had been left with Mr. Bridgens. He paid the money to Mr. Bridgens next day, August 1, and received a receipt dated July 31. This was by arrangement made with Mr. Bridgens by telephone on July 31.

William F. Rayner, in corroborating portion of plaintiff's evidence, mentioned that Tumble was a "pacer" as distinct from a "trotter." After several witnesses had been called and varying accounts had been given about the exact time and place at which the letter was out under defendant's door by plaintiff, a witness was called to say something about arrangements to settle the case. His Honor declined to accept such evidence as relevant.

"The only issue," he said, "is whether or not the letter was put under the door, and, if so, what damages."

Andrew B. Brvce, trotting trainer and driver, gave a valuation of Tumble, as known on July 31, at £200.

For the defence, Mr. Spence said evidence would be given by defendant and his wife that they were at home on July 30 and 31 throughout the evening, and they would be corroborated by another witness. They would say they were unaware of any visit by McKay. Defendant gave evidence accordingly and said he had a receipt made out ready for McKay, but got no visit or ring on the telephone from him. (Proceeding.)