Stablekeepers' Liability.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XLVI, Issue 89, 19 April 1904, Page 2

Stablekeepers' Liability.

AN INTERESTING DECISION. AI. the Magistrate's Court on Monday Mr T. Hutchison, 8.M., heard the action Iluunu v. M. .lones, a claim for £lO for damages for not carefully keeping and re-delivering two horses left with the defendant. Mr Hutchen appeared for the plaintiff ami Mr Malone (Messrs Malone, McVeairh and Anderson) for the defendant. The plaintiff gave evidence that on Boxing Day he loft two horses with the defendant, to be fed night and morning, stating he would cull for them next day. When he went next morning for them defendant said they had got out of the paddock and gut away. He went up to the paddock with one of the defendant's men, and saw that the fences wore in good order, and the gate was properly secured. He went to Hawcra to look for the 'horses, and from there lo Pihama, but'did not find them, and linally his 'brother-in-law found one ut I'ungarohu, and the other was impounded at Okato. The ■horse was sold out of the pound for £1 lis, the poundage fees being £ii 7s. I-le valued the 'horse at. £7. His claim was made up of this and his expenses whilst searching for the animals.

Cross-examined by Mr Malone : He dl-J not deliver the horse to MiJones' son, and did not say the ■nurse was to be paddocked. One of the horses was a racehorse, and could jump. The. other was a three-year-old, and he would swisjar that it hafl been broken in. It might follow the other one. He went to 1-fuwcra not to look for the horses, but to see a relative about them.

This closed the plaintiff's case. Air M-jlone moved for a nonsuit, on the ground that the .slablekeuper had only to use reasonable calx- and was not, an insurer, -and that on the plaintiff's evidence the fences were in good order.

The. Magistrate refused the application.

Mr Malone then called The defendant's son, William Jones, who said that the Maori brought tile horses to him. His father (live defendant) was not present. Tnc plaintiil told him to put the horses in the paddock until alter the races. He did so, securely fastening the gate. In the morning he heard that the horses were out, went to the paddock, found the gate open, and the fastening post forced outwards as though it hud been shoved open with sonie considerable force.

Cross-examined by Mr Hutchon : When he went to the ptiddock the gate was standing open inwards. The gate was fastened with a wire loop.

Michael Jones, the defendant, gave evidence that he did not see the plaintiff at all on Boxing Day. Only knew about the horses because his son told him. He saw them, and reckoned one was unbroken. Had used the paddock for some live or six years, with the same fastening in use, and never had horses out before. He considered it was quite safe.

I'm trick McGehun, employe at Mr Jones' stable, gave corroborative evidence, explained about the gate lastening, and as to the forcing out o( the post on tiro morning after Boxing Day. He surmised that the gfcte was forced open by the horses either trying to jump it and getting caught or by their shoving up against it.

Cross-examined : He couldn't say whether he could have pulled the post over himself, and 'didn't think his theory a ridiculous one. Henry Okoy said he had examined the gate and fastening, and was Quito satisfied us to their safety. He would not hesitate to leave his own horse in the paddock. Had had experience of horses all his life. The Magistrate held that the stublekeeper was only bound to use reasonable care and was not an insurer ; that he did not think, ns suggested by Mr Hutchen, that Mr Jones should have padlocked the gate, as Mr Jones had used the paddock for several years, and found the fastening quite sufficient. Judgment for defendant, with costs £2 3s.