MAYOR’S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 2884, 17 May 1872, Page 2

MAYOR’S COURT.

This Day, (Before his Worship the Mayor.) CHARGE OF ILLEGALLY DETAINING A HORSE. The defendant Alexander Fraser was charged by the claimant Thomas Harrison with" illegally detaining a horse, value LlO. The evidence for the complainant was heard yesterday, and the case was adjourned on the objection taken by Mr Stewart for the defendant, that “a horse” did not come under the 24th section of the Town and Country Felice Ordinance, as “goods,” the term used in the section. His Worship said that he had carefully considered the objection raised by Mr Stewart, and although inclined to think there was much force in it, he had concluded that the complaint would lie. The preamble of the Act did not define the word “ goods,” and as to the contention of the learned counsel that the definition of the word “ cattle” would prevent any case coming under that section, he thought himself bound to take the common sense definition. On reference to Walker’s dictionary he found “goods” to he defined “ anything moveable.” He therefore thought there was a case to answer, and it must he gone into on its merits.

Mr Stewart said liis Worship excluded the legal definition of the word “ horse,” which was of far more authority than Walker’s Dictionary. Chitty, on law, said that the word “chattels” was more comprehensive than “goods,” as it included cattle; and as the Legislature used the legal phraseology and had elsewhere given a word that included “horses,” he thought their definition must be preferred. His Worship said he fancied that was because there were so many sections in the Ordinance which applied to cattle. Chitty did not, except by implication, include the word “ horse ” in “ chattels.” As the Ordinance did not define the intention of the Legislature in using the word “goods,” he thought common sense Justified him in including “horse ” in that terra. He thought therefore an action would lie. Mr Stewart felt so strongly on the matter that he did not go prepared to go into the case. He had, therefore, only one witness present able to throw some light on the subject. He thought such prosecutions should be discouraged, as the matter pould have been dealt with in a civil court. The tendency of such proceedings was to place defendants at very serious disadvantage, as they were precluded from giving evidence ; prosecutors, therefore, obtained advantages they ought not to have. After hearing Smith’s evidence, he thought it would be concluded the case was one of mistaken identity. The horse was bought by defendant of one Roberts, who bought it of Kiehol, an express driver, who had it some time. Kiehol bought it of Arthur Smith, who purchased it of Sinclair, then living at Silverstream, in the employ of Mr Macgregor. for three years. The horse was well known by some persons out at Silverstream. and Smith was prepared to swear the same hor. e was sold by him five or six years ago. If these facts were proved it was not possible that the horse was that which Harrison lost twelve mouths ago. In i he general description given of that horse, it was said there were two or three spots at the most—saddle marks,—while on Fraser’s horse there were four on one side and three on the other. Harrison said his horse was liable to sleep when standing and then to fall. That perhaps was not uncommon, but there was no evidence to shew that Fraser’s horse had that habit. Under the circumstance he would tender Smith’s evidence, and if needful ask a further adjournment. Arthur Smith, stable keeper and horse horse dealer. He had not been shown the horse in dispute. He bought the horse of Sinclair, on the Oth December, 1871, and exchanged it with Kiflhol, who sold ik to Fraser. He believed it was the same horse he bought in 1867 from Mr Gibson, Silverstream, and sold to a cabman, named McEwcu in the Valley. There were many horses very much alike—half bred. Brands

were often difficult to distinguish as they presented difference according to the season of the year. Sinclair was a respectable mtfh. In reply to the informant, the witness said Sinclair was a stock-rider and general hand on the station at Silverstream. The case was adjourned to Tuesday. OFFENCES AGAINST THE TOWN AND COUNTRY POLICE ORDINANCE. William Ferguson, for riding in a waggon, drawn by six horses, without reins on the Caversham road, was fined 40s and costs. ( FFENCES AGAINST THE BYE-LAWS. William Burchardt, for leaving his express waggon, without the wheel being chained, in Maclaggan street, was fined 2s 6d and costs. Thomas Ram age, for a like offence in Great King street, his dray having been left twenty minutes, 5s and costs.