ILL-TREATING A HORSE

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 266, 6 August 1919, Page 5

ILL-TREATING A HORSE

ARCHIBALD CASE REHEARD

FINE IMPOSED INSTEAD OF IMPRISONMENT At first sentenced to fourteen days' imprisonment with hard labour on a change of cruelly ill-treating a horse by working it while it was suffering from an extensive sore, John Frederick Archibald was yesterday fined £\5, in lieu of the original sentence, by Mr. E. Page, S.M., at the Magistrate's Court. On tho application of counsel for the defendant. .\lr. J. Scott, His Worship had wanted a rehearing, and in view of tho additional evidence placed before hin.. he decided to alter his previous decision. Mr. E. H. Webb appeared on behalf of the Society for tho Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, and called evidonce to substantiate the charge. Sergeant Edwards and Constable Williams gave evidence as to seeing the horso being worked and as to drawing the defendant's attention to the 6ore. Wil nesses considered that the horse was ( not in a fit condition to bo worked. ( Inspector Henry, of the Society for the 1 Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, gave evidence that the defendant must have been aware of the pain he was causing the horse. H.) admitted that defendant waf somewhat dull. Mr. Webb said that he had conferred with the president of Ihe society on this particular case, and he wished it to bo understood that the suciely was not "head-hunting," nor was the society desirous of persecuting anyone. The society was simply otn to see that animals were not' crueliy ill-treated, It was not generally known that a term of imprisonment, withoi't the option- of a fine, could be imposed on proved cases_ of cruelty, and no doubt the publicity given this caso would lend valuable aid to the society. 511. Scott then galled evidenoe for the defence.

George Nathan, land agent, said that he knew the defendant, and he had been personally impressed from his own observations of the defendant that he was a. man who always looked after hie noises. He had 6een tho defendant almost daily, and. on a most heavy portion of the Wndestown road he had often seen hint tret off his vehicle, stroke his horses and talk to 'them.

A sister of the defendant eaid that ho was the mainstay on the farm, and did practically, all the work. Her mother was very aged, ivnd was unable to do anything. Some ojntment had been applied to the wound, and the horse had been cared for. She had endeavoured to obtain horses, but without result. There was a difficulty also in obtaining suitable drivers, and the defendant was possessed of a special knowled;: o of the road, which required skill to negotiate. The defendant had met with an accident some years .igo, and since then ho had never been the same. Defendant was always particularly kind to the horses If he were sent to gaol witness would have to close the farm down.

1 ,, . W. Bell, farmer, of ICarori, v raid tha f . he had experienced difficulty in oT>taming horses. The horse was in fnir u'orkine condition before the prosecution. H. Ash worth, carrier, of Wadeetown, fia : (l he wae a teacher of a Sunday school, and he knew the defendant well. He found him lacking in intelligence—ho was »ather dull.

The dofendant gave evidence, and fiaid that he told the constable that the horse had had a sore previously, and it 'had heeled up, but later broke out again. The horse was not worked hard. It was put in the shafts nt 11.30, and was taken out again at 3 p.m Ho had told his sister that he had been warned about usiiip; tho horse. He had endeavoured in obtain a substitute for the horse.

}lis Worship snid that sufttwent addilional evidence had been called to show that the defendant had not been guilty of vicious cruelty towards the horse, but at the enmo lime the animal had been cmellv ill-treated. He did not think the defendant ii proper person to have chui'Ko of a horse, ae he might not be able to realise thn pain it wns' suffering, iin would alter the sentence to one of a fine of Sit), in default fourteen days' imurisonmenl.