THE END OF THE DOG CASE.

North Otago Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8173, 3 May 1895, Page 3

THE END OF THE DOG CASE.

At tho Magistrate's C >urt yosterday MUjor Keddell give judgment as follows u tho caso of Shrimskt v. Bruco : This case in one to rcover posscfsion of a brown ro'riovcr dog, taken by the defendant and c'airned by him as his proporty, or tho sum of LlO, its alleged value, and a further sum of L 5, bs damigo for tho dotnntion. Among tho fao"s admitted or established are ihaso : Tho diictidinL became pos'icsstd of a brown retriever pup ab ut throe or four months old iti April, 1893, tho dog hiving been pupped on D.Cdiubor 28 h, 1892. Tho plaintiff bocamo possessed of n dug flimilatly described in April, 1891, also threo months old, this dog having boon pupped in tho lit or en J of tho previous Decomber. In May, 1894, these two dogs were one year and &ye months and fivo months oH respectively. I-i tho month of Miy, 1894, plaintiff, forro^annH, loft his dig with Mr Hodge, of Tyno stroot, for three weeks, and at the cxpiiy of this time took it bick to his plac ■. In tho litter end of tho same month, and after the 24 h, tho defend mi's dog disappeared, and wa* fluppoied by him to have been stolen. Those facts aro imoortmt, for they show the co>exi4onoo of tho two dogs, and (hat for a fortnight out of tho thrco weeks Hodge had Shrunsk's dog, Bruce wis in posses <ion of h a own dog. Mr Hcdgo was asked in cross-ex-amination whether B'uce senior over cl timed or ouquired about the dog. I think this w<is ha'dly likely. In tho first \tUoi Slinmaki'a dog was but fivo mon hs old, and his son's dog was a yoar o!dor, In thu Hocond place, ns I have pointed out, at th's time defendant had not lost his d<>g. After taking tho dog back, the plaintifl kopt him at his house in the North Ro-ul ; the plaintifl'a und defendants residences nro n little ovor a quirter of a mile apait. At the end of June plaintifl went to Wellington with hia family, lowing the dog in chtrgo of hh sjtTanie. In Octobor he returned and found tho dog as he had loft him. Ho tried him with a certiin trick he had taught him before having, that of fetching the newspaper from the Ktter box, and ihe do* did i\ Tho dog rouvuned in his po c so9sion as hitherto, somotimts on the chain and sometimes off, until the 10th January, 1895, when on thit day, being taken by pliiutid's direction to the Beafor exircise, ho runs from the boy who hns cliargo of him, and as Mrs Bruco, tho dof undent's wife, siys, ho s»t down iv tho road opposite defendant's house. Mrs Bn.co soems to think that the aninvtl was trying to recall to mind whero ho hid seen this place, before, and coming to tho conclusion thit this was her dog, " that was lost and is found," callod him by tho name of hor lost dog, then lost about eight months, " Watch." The dog spproiched her, and to her mind \ fleomed to recogntee her, and she detained him as her husband's lost proper' y. On Bruco'a return, for he was absent when the dog came, ho recognised him also. Some few diys afterwards ho is walking in Tyne street, the dog accompanying him, when Mr Shnmski, recognising tho dog, calls after him and takes possession, and on tho defendant claiming him refers hm to tho p lice. On the 4th of Fobruary, howovtr, the dog reappears ab Bruces house and is again taken possession of, and the plaintiff, having knopn of Bruco'a claim, on missing the dog, naturally goes to tho defendant's to look for him. Ho finds him in Bruces possession, and, after some dispute, and after some irregular proceed' ingb on the criminal sido of the Court, lira action was commenced to recover possession. It U undeniable that there roust be a very great resemblance between tho two animals, and X havo no reason to doubt the bona fides and coneoientioua desire to tell tho truth on tho part of the many witnesses who have testified for tho defendant, and yet I am bound to come to the conclusion that tho pUlotiff is entitled to a verdict, His osse shows t continuous pouoaalon of the animal that on January 10th last wia taken by Mm Bruce to bo that stolen or whtoh disappeared from her hous» oight month! bifore, I don't think anyono who hau hip thli dog In Court will

wonder Rt his coming to Mrs Bruce when hlio accosted him Ito evidontly is of n vory kindly disposition find of high intoll'goncn and most likely friondly ovortureß from ft lady would bo s'rongly associated in lits mind with a larder and good things 'o come, nnd I nmko no doubt that in his now chario'nr as •' the wmdorer returned " ln> vraa wo'l r<coival and outertainod, and not by Mrs Bruoo alono, but by hor sis' or, Mrs Bruce aonr., and tho n. ighbors, mid it is possible he found Ins now quavtois very pleasant, and tho c ress a which wore lavished on this impostor, for auoh I must oonaider him, contrastod very favorably n it li the discipline of Mr SluiuiHki's establishment, and I nm not surprised tint when at librrty on tho 4th of Fobru,»ry ho roi urnpd to Mr liruco I*.1 *. Tho theory of the defence is »hat tho plain till, or hs ftuggostt'd hiasprvant, carelessly lost his mubter'n dog, "found" Bruco's which bad Ik'uii lost in May, a d p »lmed ofY iho now dog on Shrimßki I don't thmk this possible To-day pos--ib'y tljo diffcronco in t hi* ngoi of tho two J d 'gs would not bo bo no'ic>abli', but in August, say, last year, ono dog w.ia o-glifc inontlip, nnd the othor ono yoir and oight months old, and I think ono could Inrdly hi inisakon for tho other. Bub tho Court cannot look oubido for thooiios whon Iho evidonco is hero. If tho dofendant thinks this to havo boon tho c<\ho •■vidiiico should bo fori booming. Ono !>iico of ovidonco oould hive boon given, vnd by both paities, and 'hat is rogiatfft tion, Bruc('.H dog Rhould havo bien onistorcd in July, 1893, and tho pl-in-tift'a in July, 1894. Had this boon done with the careful description that the togiator required it ispo«sible this trouble »ould h< vo been avoided. I find iho dig \n the posBoPBion of tho dofuudaut, to bo tho propor.y of Iho plaintiff, and I oider 'hat possession bo given to plaintiff, or if out of his powtT, in default dofondnnt pay tho sum of L 5, valno of tho dog, and I further ordor defendant to pay (o plainirt i ho sum of la as dtinages for tho dotoution of tho dog, and to pay tho costs of tho case. Tho cos's were as follows: Wimcs«os' i oxponsts, L 2 6a ; Court coats, LI 18s ; solicitor's foe, LI Os-to'al, L 5 9i. j Mr Crawford H«k"d for leavo to appeal, but tho Mtgistra^ paid he could not do ■<o, as tho doci-ion win based on tho facts, an-1 tho In\v nmdo no provision for an nppeal sucli as that a<k< d for by counsel.