R. M. COURT HAMILTON.

Waikato Times, Volume X, Issue 714, 13 January 1877, Page 2

R. M. COURT HAMILTON.

Before W N Searancke, Esq, R M.

Thursday, J*n 11th. Chitty v. Black. — Claim, £5 lOs ; being balance of prioe of a horse bought from plaintiff by defendant. Mr Whitaker ior plaintiff, Mr Hay for defendant. William Black, deposed — I am a baker. Remember purohasiug a horse from p aintifF, on tbe 17_h November. Plaintiff told me he was nine years old. lam not working the horse now, as he is lame ia the off pastern joint. I seat word to Mr Chitty to take him away, aa he waa useless to me. He went lame a fortnight after I got him. I was to give £6 10. fjr the horse, and had paid £1. Wait, r Chitty, swo.*n, recollected the sale of a black horse to defendant. I caw defendant ou the 15th November. He bad another horse hirn.ssed m his trap, which wouldn't so. He asked ma to bring my horee He said, if he was satisfied it would draw tbe trap tha 1 ; day, he would pay me the prici I asked for it, £6 10$, one pound deposit, and the re* mainder at the end of the month. He drove the horse about all tbat day, de* livering his bread, and returned to Longbottom's store, said he was satified wii-h the horse, and gave me the £1 ou accon t. I .gave him delivery of the horse next morning. I g*ve no warrantry with the horse. I said he was old and alow, but, would answer defendant's purpose vory well. I did not say the horse was only nine years old. He was t"0 well known as a commissariat horse to say that. On the Ist of December I oalled for the balance of the money . Blaok atid the horse suited him well, but asked for mo c time, until the middle of the month. Three or four days after, he sent for me. and told me the horse had gone lame, a cl aiked me to take him back. I refos.d, alter his having had him, and worked him for that time. Defendant told me be had two front shoes put on him wheo. he bought him, and the two hind shoes afterwards. 1 had told him to g^.t the hone shod, as he could not tr ivel with b vre f et on the gravel aud hard road. Cross-examined by Mr Hay— Mr Black spoke to me drat aoout the horse. No one was present when the bargain was made. Mr Knox cime up afterwards, and saw the money paid. I said nothing about lameness. He was not lame then. I am not sure whether my attentiou was drawn by Knox or Black to the horse's pastern. I dont recollect saying he'll never go home, iv allusion to a sw.lli ig on the postern j nut, pointed out by Mr Knox. On one- oe. anon .during last winter, the horse had be^u lama. I took his shoes off, and let him mv. He was badly lame m the hind leg. I worked him after be got well. I did not inform defendant that he bad been lame. . To the Court — The horse was not m any way guaranteed, Mathew de Vere Hunt, sworn, I am a settler residing at Kirikbiroa, I know the horse subjeot of this action, I saw him several times being driven by defendans after the aute. I twice asked him how tbe ho *s. was going on. He replied the horse is all right and will do wlnt I have to do. Tho | hor.e wis not lame when I saw him. This was the c*se for the plaintiff. Mr Black again examined — I bought the bars, on the 17tih November opp.site Longbottom's store m the presence of John Knox, I swear I had not b.iu/ht him previous to that. He was put m the cart previously and driven d>wn as far as Hyde-, but not as fir as No 1 bridge. At the tune of settlement ot tbe bargain I pointed out the swelling on the lowest j jint of the off hind foot. Mr Chut, eaid that would never hurt hira. He guaranteed him to Mr Knox as having nothing the master with him. Mr KLnox was acting on my b-di^lf a. witness to the bargain. The horse worked 12 days and then went lame m the swelled joint. I sent the horse biot to Mr Chitty. If Mr Chitty had told me he was lame on that joint I should not have bought him. I never told Mr Chitty that the fore shoes had been put on before the hini one.. They were all put on at the same time. Cross examined — I askod the £ from Mr Knox when he was at the corner of the street. He was standing there wh< n we diove up and 1 asked him first to witness the purchase o. the horse. He consented to do so. . " . v John Knox, sworn, said I am an auc y tioneer carrying on business m Hamilton. I remember the sale of the horse from . plaintiff to defendant outside Longbottom's door. I asked Mr Chitty on defendant's behalf, if the horse was all right. Ho replied, yes except tbat he wao old —that ho was staunch and that ' there was nothing the matter with him. I don't rememl er any swolling m the foot bein^ pointed out to plaiutiff Defendant agr.oJ . to lake '.he horse.

Cross- xamined-Mr Blaok did not pay me, even tbe prce of one bottle of lemonade, I wouldn't, hxve dr.xnk a pint •of beer, bain* a Free Templar. It was as unprofitable j >b. By the Court- 1 shouldn t like to sweor there was a swelling m tbe hind pastern jojnt. , , . CltatUsMullir.s. deposed to heing present at the sale of tha hor^e. Mr -Black I think, asked if he was qmet, staunch and eound. Mr Cht ty said yes. Defendant ditr not draw attenMon to the state of the horse's leg. Mr Knox as; ed if the horse wa* quite staunch and sound. Plaintiff replied that he was quite souud. I did not see any money paid. Oross-examiaed-I said "I think" Mr Blaok asked questions because I did not p<iy particular notice. I was not concerned m the transaction. Re-ekamined-fam sure Mi Chitty said Jne was staunch, sound and quiet. a; To the Court-In reply to a question •/rom Black, Chitty said the horse was staunch nnd sound. Robt Williamson, blacksmith of Hamilton East, deposed to shoeing the horse for Mr Chitty ;if was not lame then. I "remember it being lame when L took the j shoes off. I think it must have been caured by a stumble. T did not look upon it as a permanent ii jury. I shod the horse again for Mr Bl.ok on the 2lst tr 22nd of November. 1 shod him all round at the same time. I h*ive »een him since. il did not obs rye that he was lame. The Court considered the whole of the evidence vague and conflicting as to any warrantry being given. The defect was plainly to be seen by-defendant and it was simply his own fault if he was deceived by it It was absurd for-any one to suppose an old Commissariat horse worth j£6 10 could be sound, Judgment for -plaintiff, with costs £2 10.