(Continued from 4th page.)

North Otago Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8169, 29 April 1895, Page 1

(Continued from 4th page.)

sized rotriover dog. It was out of Bruce'a bitch. James M tohell, baker, said he gob a dog from O'Connor, of Scuth Oamaru. Avery's dog was the sire, nnd O'Connor's elut tho mother. His dog would now be about 18 months old. Ho thought the dog was liko Avoiy'a djg, is sire. Ho had given the dog to Mrs Blair. Marion Bruce, wife of John Bruce, coal merchant, said Gto. Bruco got a pup from her husband while they were in Chelmer street. She was sure the Jog she saw in January, 1895, was the dog her son owned, because she knew it from certain marks. The dog produced wan the dog She had seen tho dog pretty often beforo it was loat. When the dog came back in January, it bohaved in tho same way as it did before it was lost. Mitchells dog was tho father of her brother's dog. To Mr Harvey : " Watch " came back in January, nud she went over and saw the dog, and was perfectly i-atisfied that the dog that came back was her son's dog. Her husband had not told her that ho had seen the dog near Hodge and Jones' George Bruce, defendant, sud tho dog (produced) was hs. He got tho dog after tho harvest of 1803, and had it till the latter end of May, 1891, Ho had taught tho dog many tricks. [Mrs Blairs dog was then produced, and Counsel for tho defence asked Mr Jas. Mitchell, whether the dog was or was not the dog ho had given fc<> Mrs Blair. Tho answer was in the affirmative. Mr A. Avery also gave evidence with regard to tho relationship of the dogs.] George Bruce, continuing his evidonco, Raid he had hoard Mr Shrimski aay his dog had been taught tricks. He lost the dog about the latter end of May, and mado many enquires, but with no result. Ho noxt saw the d«>g when he came back from Catlins aboutthejmiddle of January. When he arrived homo, he wont to his ptu outs' place, the dog bei-<g there. Ho called the dog, and it came to him. From the general appearance of the dog ho was huro tho dog was his. The dog followed him quite readily. In Tyno street Mr Shrimski caught the dog, and took i into Hodge and Junes' shop. He ask d Mr Shrimski what ho was doing with the dog. Mr Shrimski said, " Ho would have to go to tho police to get his dog." Tho dog came homo on tho 3id mat., and, being in bed, tho dog came into his bodroom. He went into town, nnd when ho returned about 1 o'clock Mr Shrimski was blowing a whistle. He know tho animal from the white marks on the breast and the color of his hair. Tho pup ho got was from his fathor's placo. Ho re^ cognistd tho mother of his dog. His dog was registered this month, on tho 20th. When tho dog roturncd in January 95 it had no collar ; but when it came back in April it had a collar on— an old one of 1891 (produced ) Mr Shrimski had tho dog from the 4th of February to tho 2nd of April. Sinoo then defendant had had possession of tho dog. Ho used no persuasion to entice tho dog back. To Mr Harvey : Tho dog returned on April 3. Tho dog came home, and Mrs Bruce tied tho dog up. Ho thought a dog could not, unless taught, do the trick of lifting up tho lid and getting tho paper. Ho had not soon Mr Grant taking a dot' to tho beach. Ho had not noticed a dog liko his about. The mother of the doj* was a medium sot rotriovor. S. E. Shrimski, plaintiff, said he never isked anyone to drown the dog. Ho wanted his dog taught to swim, and Grant's boy took his dog to tho beach to teach it to swim, and he had taken the dog down himself. Ho had not takon^ theso proceedings to vindicate himaolf in" Iho eyes of tho public. Tho collar (produced) was his, sold to him by Trooper Hunt. Ho kept tho dog till J-muiry, 1895, Mr Bruco, ho thought, took his dog. The dog was lured into Mr Bruco's house. Ho had tho dog from April, 1894, to January, 1895 ; and also had the dog from Fobruary to 4th April, 1895, Tho dog haduot tried to got away. To Mr Harvey : Mr Bruco did not make any attempt, from tho 4th of February to tho 3rd of April, to got tho dug back. Hodgo and Jones had the dog for three weeks, and then he got it. Mr Shrimski wont to Wellington about tho ond of June, 1894. When he came b.ick m tho end of October the dog was still at hi house. During the time Bruco's dog was supposed to bo lost his dog was in his Dossossion.

Sat uk day. Thomas Palmer, living in Ouso Street, said ho knew Mr Grant's son, and went with him on one occasion, on a Sunday, to put Mr Shrimski'a dog in iho watir. After putting him in tho wa'er the dog went to Bruce's. This was in January last. About 12 months ago ho had seen the dog at Bruce'e. To Mr Harvey : Ho would bo surprised to hoar that tho boy Grant never had tho dog on Sunday, This closed tho case. Mr Crawford addrrtßsed tho Court on tho facts, and on tho difficulty of determining the age of a dog by its leoth, and quoted several authorities on the subject Mr Harvey also addressed tho Couri on tho facts. Tho Magistrate resorved his decision till Tuesday, and incidentally romaiked that ho had no doubt that tho witnesses on both sides gave evidence that they believed to bo true.