MATERNAL INSTINCT.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1344, 23 January 1912, Page 8

MATERNAL INSTINCT.

AN UNSUAIi CASE. A case resembling that of Solomon ami the babv was decided rooentlv in a AVelsh County Court. The plaintiff was a cat-tle-dealer. anil the defendant a neighbour. Both owned a number of mountain ponies, including two ponv mares which were expected l to foal about tho same time. A\ hen the respective owners went up the mountain'to discover whether tho mares had foaled tlwy found the foal sucking both mares, and subsequently a dead foal was found in tho river close by. Tho plaintiff, who sued the defendant for the value of tho foal, «EJ 10s., with ,El by way of tlamatres, said he w;is positive the mare was his. AVlien the defendant first complained that Iris foal was sucking the wrong mare, plaintiff suggested that if the foal did not recognise its mother by tho end of tho year it should bo told, and tho money divided, but the defendant declined; nor would lie agree to a suggestion' that two independent farmers should be called in to decide tho ownership. Defendant removed his mare with tho foal from tho mountain to a farm, and plaintiff took his mare down there. AVhen the maro was within two or three roods of the farm it neighed, and tho foal came up to the gate and tried to suck the mare, while the defendant's mare did not stir from tho bottom of the field. His mare, having been deprived of her foal, had lo be milked twice a day for nine days, and lie claimed ,E1 damages for that. The defendant iu his evidence said he nulled a foal out of the river, and plaintiff's maro went up to 'it and licked it, whilst his own mare took no notice of it. The .Tudgc said the defendant acted unwisely in taking the foal from the mountain under the circumstances, and awarded the plaintiff «£3 10s., the 'value of Ihe i'oal, with 10s. damages.