HORSE DEALERS

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 220, 6 December 1927, Page 15

HORSE DEALERS

DIFFER IN OPINION SALE OF BINGEN BELL NO FRAUD PROVED (From Our Own Correspondent) HAMILTON, To-day| In the Supremo Court, Hamilton, yesterday, a case of interest to trotting supporters was heard, when Alfred William Ebbett, motor salesman, sought to recover £560 from Robert Young, farmer, Matamata, in connection with the sale of the horse Bingen Bell. He claimed that defendant verbally represented to him that he had paid £ 500 for the horse as a foal, and had spent £BO in training it. Defendant had stated that the horse had been valued at £ 500 by the breeder, Lelievre, of Akaroa, and had been represented as being eqLially as good a horse as Great Peter. Plaintiff alleged that defendant said that the names of three horses, Bingen Bell, Great Peter and a Nelson Bingen colt, had been placed in a hat, and defendant had drawn Bingen Bell. All were valued at the one price, £SOO. Plaintiff claimed that he purchased Bingen Bell on defendant’s representations, and he now alleged that each of these representations were untrue. Defendant, he said, had ptirchased the horse l'or £4O, and not for £SOO.

Young admitted that he had bought the horse for £4O, and denied telling Ebbett that it cost £SOO as a foal. He had said the horse cost £ 600, meaning expenses attached to keep and training.

In giving judgment for the defendant Justice Herdman said the case depended entirely on facts, and the plaintiff had failed to. discharge the onus of disproving them.