R. M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3780, 8 April 1891, Page 2

R. M. COURT.

CARTERTON.—rUESDAY. (Before Col. Roberts, R.M.) I W, B. Allen v. Thomas Ray. Mr Acheson for plaintiff, Mr Beard for the defendant. Claim, £lB 17s. Tli6 claim, as set forth in the bill of particulars, was for loan of a saddle and making use of the Taratahi Race course for training purposes and other works done by the plaintiff for defendant.

W. B. Allen deposed that the defendant detained a racing saddle belonging to him (the plaintiff). He made no arrangement with the defendant in respect to the saddle. A young man by the name of Booth came and borrowed it to ride a horse called Cribbage.. The defendant lent him another saddle to uae while lie was making use of his- He neyer made any arrangement to exchange saddles with the defendant. He returned the saddle to the defendant which was lent. H» considered his saddle worth a great deal more than the one belonging to the defendant. Notice was served on the defendant to return the saddle and he said that he (witness) had one belonging to him. Witness saddle, (when he lent it to the defendant), was worth five pounds. He worked two days with his horse and cart getting in corn, for which he charged one pound, that being the usual price, and he had done other work for the defendant at different times.

To Mr Beard : The reason that I have not made any claim before was that 1 owed the defendant money for wool whiih he stied me for last Court day ; if he had not made any charge on me for the wool I should not have made this demand. We have usually worked together in a give and take style in gathering in hay. The arrangement between me and the defendant was that the defendant should use the race course free of charge, for the purpose of training his own horses, but the amount now sued for is for the training of a horse called Pilgrimage, and which ran in Mr Osborne's name.

The defendant deposed that he knew the horse Pilgrimage, and that he got him in March, 1888. He ran him at the o[).«ki, Porirca, and the Hutt races.

To Mr Acheson: He was partly trained on the Taratahi Race Course. In March, April, and May, I was training on the course, but desisted on account of pla ntiff accusiug my boy of leaving the gates open. The saddle in dispute is still in my house, and the saddle came into my possession by an exchange with the plaintiff about seven years ago. When I got the saddle, the tree was broken. I paid the saddler and the blacksmith some 82s for repairing the saddle. The plaintiff was building the Belvedere school at the time. He came and asked me to exchange saddles on account of his being too small, and said he would rather have a larger one, I never borrowed a saddle at any time from the plaintiff. If Booth borrowed a saddle from plaintiff he did it-on his own account. I never received any .order from the plaintiff. I still owe .the amount, L2 17s 6d, to Mr Hare for '.he thrashing. My agreement with the plaintiff was that I could train all horses belonging to me free of charge, and the horse Pilgrim,'-.;e was in my possession froin March to August, 1888. I did not agree to reduce the rent in consideration of being allowed to train my horses on the race course. The plaintiff has had the saddle which he got from me till a fortnight ago. when he sent his man with it and left it against a stack, I ac once returned the saddle to the plaintiff. The reason that I refused to pay the account was because I considered the work that I had done for him more than compensated for whit he had done for me. The sixteen shillings which is purported to have been paid, was paid on ac • count of Mr H. Mac Master and had nothing to do with th« work done. Osborne was the actual owner of the horse Pilgrimage. I leased him from Osborne for the season of 1888.

At this stage the Court adjourned for lunch.

On resuming, Mrs Allen, wife of the plaintiff, deposed that she knew the defendants, Tbos Bay and Joseph Booth. Remembered them borrowing a saddle belonging to her husband. Booth stated that his employerf(Mr Ray) sent him for the saddle. It was sometime in 1884. On the last occasion when Booth came to borrow the saddle she gav him the saddle herself.

To Mr Beard: I don't suppose that there would have been any of these proceedings if there had been no unpleasantness cropped up between tiie parties. To Mr Acheson: My husband does not tell me all his. business transactions.

Plaintiff, re-called, stated that he had received the saddle girths and the stirrups belonging to the saddle. Counsel for the plaintiff asked to withdraw the £2 17s 6d, being the amount of order from Mr Hare.

Joseph Booth deposed that abou seven years ago he was in the employ of Mr Ray, and he remembered Mr Allen bringing a saddle to Mr Ray and asked him to exchange saddles as bis was too Bmall. Mr Allen removed the girths and stirrups from his saddle. He said that his saddle bad too small knee pads end he wanted a larger one for rough riding. Witness never borrowed a saddle from Mr Allen either for himself or Mr Ray, Whrn he was living with Mr Ray, Allen and him used to help each other in haying and harvesting. To Mr Acheson: When Allen spoke to me about the saddle, I told him distinctly that it was a "swop" Judgment was given for plaintiff for £2, Court costs 235, and solicitor's fee 21s.

MASTERTON-WEDNESDAY. Before Messrs M. Caselberg and A. W. Renall, J's.P.) Larceny. George Graham was charged with that be did, on the 7th inst., feloni ously steal and carry away one knife of the value of Bs, the property of Willtam Francis, restaurant keeper, Thp accused pleased guilty. William Francis, on affirmation, deposed: 1 keep a restaurant in Queen street, Masterton. I saw the accused in my restaurant about live o'clock last evening. He came in and went out again without having anything to eat. After he had gone I missed a table knife, oi ■ the value of four shillings. I at once gave information to the police and the accused was jrrested. Constable Casbion deposed to arresting the accused in Queen«Bti'©Bt

an d finding tho knife in his possession. He took him to the polioe station and charged him with the offence.

Mr Renall (to the accused): Had you been drinking ? « The accused: Yea, unfortunately. Sergeant Price: Drinking is no excuse, your Worships, Mr Renall: We know all about that. Whereliave you been working ? The accused: At Bowlands, I have never been known to do the like of this before. I know very well if I had go't five minutes I would have gone back with the knife, Mr C&Belberg: Has the accused ever been convicted before ?

Sergeant Price: Not for larceny ; but he has been before the Court for riotous behaviour.

In answer to questions from the Court, Constable Cashiop stated that the man was under the influence of liquor when arrested. The Court stated that it had carefully considered Although the knife stolen was of little value, an offence had been committed. Cognisance would, however, be taken of the fact that no previous record of a similar nature was against the accused, and be would be sentenoed to 24 I hoars' imprisonment.