CROMWELL.

Dunstan Times, Issue 727, 24 March 1876, Page 3

CROMWELL.

(from our own correspondent.) Last week Mr Cargill, w ho has been in charge of the Colonial Bank during the absence on leave of Mr Gudgeon, took his departure horn our mi Ist. Tins gentleman was deservedly respected by all sections, and while obliging, civil, and courtooas to customer?, he never neglected his duties, but studied to advance the business of the Rank. In the Resident Magistrate’s Court the whop- of Tuesday was occupied in bearing a case Wrightson v. Pernam, of the Lowhurn, for having wrongfully converted a straw-berry-colored bullock, whereby the plaintiff had suffered 10-s and damage to the extent ■of L4S 10s. Mr Wrightson conducted his own cas" ; and Mr F. J. Wilson appeared for the defence, and pleaded that the bullock mentioned in the plaint was not at the time of the allege 1 conversion the property of the p'amtiff. A number of witnesses were caVed, who conclusively proved that the beast in question was the property of Wrightson ; that it was cut an I branded by the defendant; that it had previously b en branded by the plaintiff on the near side, with the brand nv upsi le down ; and afterwards branded with a P on the rnmn. I give the judgment as-delivered by the Re aidant Magistrate. W. L. Simpson. Ksq. - 41 It vnpears to the Court established beyond a doubt that Mr Wrightson was the lawful owner of a beast, which, when a caR six months’ o’d he branded with |Mr Olson’s hrand, putting it upside down as OV. It also seemed conclusive that this animal was, without the will of the lawful owner taken away, and castrated, and rebran le 1 with the letter P, which it had been shown was the brand used and adopted by Perriam. It had likewise been made

'■leaf that tho plaintiff hail spoken to the then ranger (Mr Beattie) about this calf, ami that the beast was well known to h'tn (Beattie) according to whoso testimony, which there existed lit'le reason to doubt, he had on more than one occasion spoken to the defendant upon the subject, as had abo Mr Wrightson. The most singular part of the whole transaction was the defective memory of the defendant, who did not appear to remember having had any conversa tion with Mr Beattie respecting this animid and being by him told that he had cut and branded Wrightsnn's bull. It was true ferrinm had deposed that it was a common mistake to make and brand cattle when found amongst his mob, and there being no very well marked brand visible But even accepting this doctrine the law did not excuse the wrongful act, even if done m error, while none of the witnesses for the defence could observe the original brand, but could speak with certainty respecting Perriam’s. Again the evidence adduced on behalf of the plaintiff showed that the bile and bead exactly tallied with Wriehtson's hull ; that it was a four-year old, and not a two and a-half. The evidence of Sergeant M ‘Gann was clear ami distinct, and the experience he had as Inspector of Slaughter Yards, Ac., constantly compelled him to examine brands and marks, and this witm ss speaks positively respecting the blotch brand on the near side behind the shoulder, which was put on far earlier than the branding by Perriam. I repeat, it was quite possible for the defendant to have made a mistake and overlooked the original brand, but the whole case points unmistakeablly to the beast slaughtered by 01 >s the butcher as the property of the plaintiff, and it is in evidence that the defendant sold this beast to him through Mr Mitchison, and received payment. 1 have no doubt as to the identification of the hide ; and I must say the evidence of Mr Beattie, supported as it was by other witnesses, leaves no room for doubt as to the identification of the hide and the ownership of the beast. Tlrs then being the opinion of the Court it becomes necessary to assess the damages, and here indeed is the Weakest part of the plaintiff's case. The damages sought are too large, as the only evidence on this score is that of the price paid foi the animal to Perriam. True it is Mr Wrightson had suffered considerable inconvenience and annoyance, but substantial damages had not been proved. Judgment would be for LlO, the value of the beast, with L2 4s costs of Court, and LI 12s expenses of witness ; making in all the sum of LI3 I6s. So—one of the Jockey Club feels aggrieved at my last notice concerning the mare Mystery, and states that 1 know nothing of the circumstances of the case, but I would beg to tell him and all others, that I know the whole facts, and when desirous of information, I shall apply to a more reliable source than the “ One ” referred to Before penning a line I took the precaution to, in c iinpany with another, interview the SecI retary, and was inf. rmed that no direct ! disqualification had been entered in the Minute Hook, and strange to add, a special meeting of the Club has since been hell, when the same matter was introduced, and an amendment carried supporting rules 7(5 and 77 of the Cromwell Jockey Club. IE the mare was by them disqualified, why did i not the Secretary inform the Secretary of j the Dunstan Jockey' Club, and why was a disqualified animal allowed to run? Whether the mare was intentionally entered under a false age, or otherwise, is not my duty to determine. The fact remains that the money was paid to the second horse, and other Clubs were entitle I to be apprised of the disqualification, if such existed. It is saiil that “ the man never dies ” and so it would appear that the scribe cannot be allowed to depart and end his days in peace. The “ offenaiveness of my articles” have offended the distinguished, in consequence whereof, he is, with deep regret forced to withdraw his name from the list of subscribers. Really this is a serious matter, as the loss of so valued a customer is ca'culatel to plunge the Dunstan Times info a state of hopeless insolvency, and I am sure the gentleman referred to scarcely desires to attain such a consummation. The pa'ernal care I have bestowed upon this erring brother should have merge I recognition : but like the spoilt child, he relishes the “ milk of human kindness.” Dear, lost —but not irreparably—subscriber ! Return ! Pray return ! Smile as you were wont 1 A whole sixpence a week swept away ! Where ! Oh where ! are tho week’y salaries to come from ? Ruin, de ir Mr Editor; endless ruin must result! One more subscriber with his several others gone ! Hew can you bear the loss ? This last unkind act wfll doubtless produce a financial crisis ; but if the malcontent will only return, he will in future be regarded as saero 1 property, and his shortcomings overlooked. Shall I name him.