MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 9, Issue 499, 23 January 1920, Page 1 (Supplement)

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

(Before Mr. F. K. Hunt.) TREATMENT OF HORSES.

Eric Dobson, farmer, Mauku, was charged by the police with having cruelly treated a horse. Mr. Percy H. Basley defended. Sergeaent Cowan described having seen the horse in question at Buckland's sale. It was sweating, and the kneecap of the near foreleg was out of place. Witness showed defendant the state of the horse, bat the latter did not seem to understand much about it. The horse's rear hind leg also had a sore, and the horse was lame. The sergeant said he would have shot the horse if it had been his. *

Mr. Basley said the defendant had taken the sergeant's advice, and had shot the horse. He had got off the. horse as soon as he found it was lame. The man knew nothing about horses, and this animal had suifeiied a kick before he bought it, and sweating had opened up the old wound.

Defendant, giving evidence, said he had attended to the horse's injuries, haying medicine. He had examined the horse, but he could find nothing wrong with it. He had paid only 25s for the animal —a friendly deal.

On account of the man's ignorance of horses, His Worship made no conviction. He was not satisfied that there was no wilful carelessness.

The Inspector of the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, H. Alder, proceeded against Victor McDuff, charging him with keeping a horse, which could only hobble on three legs, in a paddock to fend for itself, and where it had to travel for food and water. A clerjyman living next door used to giv6 the animal water. It was suffering from ringbone in an advanced stage.

In answer to Mr. iiasley, witness said the water was HW or 200 yards away, ande* the hqrse could not get to it without suffering. C. S. Simpson, •veterinary surgeon, described the horse 4s being in a painful condition, and would have to walk .mile? Jto ;get enough to eat. Mr. Bafiley *{said the horse had been bought for £lO, but it subsequently disposed complaints. Defendant had been sway at Takanini naymaking, did not know the animal was in such a bad condition. His Worship commented th'it it wsa strange if the uwner did not know of the state of his horse when it was a heartrending spectacle to neighbours. From the witness ux defendant md he had stopped usng the liorse when he found it lame. The animal was in a paddock of eight rcres : yood grass, and wat*; • The horse 'itrtS only limping slipMly wl.?n he saw it last. When the inspector pointed out «he horse'h condition, he was 15 miles away, and hd had it destroyed as; soon t's te ccuii get someone to do it His Worship remarked that he had power to give a man six months' imprisonment. A fine of £2 with costs £3 3s. Civil Cases. I'. Henry and Son, Patumahoe, claimed £5 17s 3d from Andrew Perry, for goods alleged to. have been supplied to defendant's order, Mr. Endean defended. Joseph Henry, principal of the ?rm, gave evidence that his books thowed that the goods had been received, Mr. Cuffe, for whom defendant was working, sinking a well having stated that Perry would guarantee payment of goods sent to himself and his men. The former substantiated this statement in the witness box. His Worship agreed with Mr. Endean that a guarantee must be in writing. Mr. Perry ought to have seen that the store bills were paid before he paid his sub-contractors. Defendant, Andrew Perry, said the plant belonged to his sons, und he let a man named Hampsford have the plant, on the understanding that each had half the proceeds. Wo satisfactory work had been done, and he had lost over £IOO trying for water. Defendant seemed to treat his £IOO loss very good-humouredly. His Worship said Mr. Cuffe had the order on behalf of Mr. Perry, and the latter had not challenged the account when he received it. Defendant would have to pay the £5 17s 3d claimed, with costs £1 16s.

The same firm claimed £8 3s lld| from Henry Nevil White, payment 1 for goods. Mr. Basley appeared for defendant, stating that £2 17s 3d had been paid into Court, but his client did not admit having received goods to the value of £8 3s lid.

J. Henry testified that defendant had promised to pay the cost. Mr. Basley contended that his client had been charged for goods received by another White of a different family altogether, the overcharge being £5 lis Continuing after the luncheon adjournment plaintiff, in cross-exam-ination, said he did not know the initials of the other man White, but his name was spelt "Whyte." He was certain that Mr. White went to him and said she would like to open a monthly account. It was quite possible that subsequently Mr White saw him and asked if he could open an account. Witnes replied, "Yes, if you pay monthly." He did not serve any of the goods. If he did his initials would be on the docket. He saw White and asked him to settle, Defendant said he would pay as soon as he received a corrected ac-

count. Defendant subsequently said he would pay, but asked for a little time. Witness told him to be quick or else he would have to take harsh measures.

To Mr. Haddow: Regarding the other Mr. White, in his opinion he thought that if he got things and was not charged for them he would notify witness. At some times in the year he employed four counter hands.

To His Worship: The first he knew of the account being wrong was when he bailed Mrs; White up and asked her when she could pay She told him they could not as she had no money, as Mr. Adams did not pay them. Witness said he had it 011 good authority that Mr. Adams paid them £ls. Mrs. White then said, "When you send in a corrected account we will pay." Witness replied, "Oh! the account is wrong is it. If you bring it in I will see it is rectified." Mrs, White then walked away.

Janet Runciman, assistant for plaintiff, gave evidence of the procedure adopted of supplying goods and entering the sold articles fn a docket book. She also gave evidence

in respect of some goods that were' disputed by defendant, and swore that although she did not serve the saw both Mr. and Mrs. White, the articles she saw them supplied, and defendants, take the goods away. The other Whyte was known as "T." Whyte, but dealt off plaintiff only casually, but not nearly as much as defendants. She did not receive { any complaints from the defendants.] To Mr. Basley: She did not recollect any other goods supplied to defendants being sold by any other counter hand. She could recollect the altered dockets, because her attention had been called to it.

Rupert Nevil White said he was share-milking for Mr. Adams at the Karaka. He commenced milking at the Karaka in August. The second, day witness was there he arranged' with Henry to open an account and to pay monthly. He obtained some goods that day and received dockets, but not always. Sometimes he paid cash. He stated that a couple of items were duplicated. In September he received an account for £3 7s liy 2 d. His wife said it was not right. He left it to his wife. He objected to amounts amounting to

Tfteir tittle Same*.

£5 lis 7y 2 d. He knew he did not get them, as he never had the dockets. Witness said he never -bou&ht any drenches at all, bat he was charged with them. Daring Aagast. September, October and November he dealt with the Farmers' Trading Company also, and among other things he purchased some groceries. He produced accounts from the Farmers' Trading Company. Some time ago Henry approached him and asked for a settlement. Witness told him to correct the account and he would pay. To Mr. Haddow: The only reason he knew he never got the articles was because he never had the dockets. He was emphatic on the point that drenches were not purchased. He told plaintiff as soon as the account was corrected he would pay. He had never had previous trouble with shopkeepers. Mrs. White, wife of defendant, said she came to this district on August 13. When she arrived she brought stores with her to the value of about £l7. She managed everything. She purchased her stores from The Farmers' Trading Com : pany, Willis' Bros., Papakura, but she had* the stores she brought with her. She was not in the hlabit of purchasing goods for Mr. Adams and other people whose cream she carted. She never got any honey, but was charged for it. She always got her docket, and put it away safely. Near the end of September she received an account for the month of August but Mr. Adams had received it and had carried it about with him. She never received any goods without a docket. No one *was ever authorised to obtain and book goods to defendant.

To Mr. Haddow: When she received the first account on or about October 4, she told Mr. Henry the account required conrecting. Sheagain told him later, upon receipt of the last two accounts, that the account was wrong.

After hearing further evidence. His Worship gave judgment for plaintiff for £4 13s lOd, together with the amount paid into Court and costs.

The police took action against several natives, Terry and- W. Cowell and M. P. Rore, the former having according to the charge, supplied liquor for consumption, to persons off licensed premises. ■ Four bottles, two of whisky and two of ale, were produced in Court giving the judicial environment quite a convivial appearance.

Terry Cowell and Rore, afterfthe charge was read to, them in Maori by Constable Christiansen, of Waiuku, pleaded guilty, as did William Cowell. The constable said the'man was under a prohibition order, and was ordinarily well behavect

Each offender was fined £1 and costs £2 2s 6d.