SETTLERS AND HORSES.

Gisborne Times, Volume VII, Issue 316, 17 January 1902, Page 3

SETTLERS AND HORSES.

. A matter of the sale and grazing of horses occupied the attention of the fcj.M. Court yesterday morning, when Mrs Walls, of Patutahi, sued Charles Ilyde for the sum of £4 15s, sale of a mare and foal to the defendant; also the return of a horse or its value of £l7, which animal was grazing in Hyde's paddock. Mr R. N. Jones appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr W. D. Lysnar for the defendant. It appeared from the evidence that Mr Hyde agreed to buy the mare and foal, but withdrew from the purchase when the bargain was to be closed. Mrs Walls had arranged with Mr Hyde for the grazing of another horse of hers, and when the completion of the purchase was to have been made, he demanded that grazing fees should be paid on account of the mare and foal. .Evidence was given by Mrs Walls, who detailed the circumstances in regard to the offer of purchase of the mare and foal. Mr Hyde agreed to buy the animal for £4 iss, but having afterwards purchased another animal he declined to complete the purchase. She stated that defendant had refused to deliver up the other animal grazing on his property, and she had demanded the return of the horse or its value. Michael Angland gave evidence as to being present at the time the offer of the purchase of the mare and foal was made, corroborating the statement of Mrs Walls as to the transaction regarding the defendant, agreeing to purchase for £4 15s, though he did not hear Mr Hyde say he accepted the offer. On the 27th November he went to get the draught horse, and tendered the pavment of the grazing of the animal, but the defendant refused to accept the amount. Mr Hyde was agreeable to take grazing fees for both the . animals, but not for one. Nora Walls, daughter of plaintiff, gave evidence as to the defendant stating that he would come the next day and pay for the horse. Charles Hyde, defendant, stated that he had arranged with Mrs Walls for the grazing of a horse at Is a week. With regard to the purchase of the other animal, he said she wanted £5, but he offered £4 15s, and nothing definite was done about it. The plaintiff wished her horses taken away, and defendant had not mentioned coming the next day and paying for the mare and foal. He had previously offered to pay the sum of £4 15s, to be paid the next day, but she had refused Ins offer A few davs afterwards he asked Mrs ’ Walls to take the animals, but she declined, as she considered a sale had taken place. Mrs Walls sent Mr Ancland for the draught horse, who tendered payment for the grazing oi the animal. He declined to accept the money, and stated that all the horses or none should be taken away. He was quite clear that there was no final contract made with regard to the Examined bv Mr Jones : He had arranged to graze one animal, and he was surprised when two animals were driven out of the paddock. He was beyond speaking distance (about two or three chains) from the gate when they were driven out, and he did not hear where the other horse was to be taken to, but when the horses followed him he put them in his paddock. Mr Lysnar submitted that there was no evidence as to a real sale, the onlydirect evidence being that or the girl. He asked for a nonsuit, there being no binding contract. With regard to the grazing, he said the plaintiff could secure his horse at any time. Mr Jones submitted that the amount for the grazing had been tendered, but hot accepted. He argued as to the contract mad?.

The Magistrate considered there was a sale, and judgment would therefore be for plaintiff for the amount claimed —£4 15s, 18s costs. On the second claim of return of mare or its value, the S.M. gave judgment that the mare be returned within 48 hours, with

damage 10s, and costs of Court £