Post by NZBC on Feb 15, 2011 21:37:30 GMT 12
AN AMUSING DOG CASE.
At the R.M. Court, Hawera, on Wednesday last a cose of some interest to to ownors of "pet" dogs waa heard before Mr Kettle, K.M. The plaintiff was " Charley Tom," a Chinese market gardener, and the defendant a Mr Douglas, the owner of some ewes which were depasturing in a paddock a few hundred yards from the Chinaman's premises. It appeared that on a certain Saturday the Chinaman's little dog — a mongrel terrier six months old — in company with another " dog friend," wandered into the paddock where Mr Douglas' sheep were grazing, and began to chase and otherwise worry and annoy the ewea. Mr Douglas, who lives close by, saw what was going on and went to a neighbour's house to get a gun wherewith to to remove the disturbing elements, but when he returned he found that the dogs, probably anticipating danger, had decamped and were on their way to a place of safety. Douglas cave chase, and coining up with his prey close to the Chinaman's house gave them a happy and quick despatch. The Chinaman at once consulted his lawyer, the result being that Douglas was sued for £10, the alleged value of the terrier. Douglas brought a cross action claiming £18 for damage done to his ewes, and both cases were by consent heard together. The learned counsel for "John," in opening the case, dwelt at some length on the virtues of th/ 9 deceaaed puppy, and stated that his client would prove that his dog could sic up on his hind logs, whistle tunea, smoke a pipe, stand on his head, and last but not least that he was a good ratter. Ho also stated that " John " and " Toby " — for that waa the dog's name " welly " fond of one .another Wanganui Herald, Volume XXVII, Issue 8266, 4 September 1893, Page 2
At the R.M. Court, Hawera, on Wednesday last a cose of some interest to to ownors of "pet" dogs waa heard before Mr Kettle, K.M. The plaintiff was " Charley Tom," a Chinese market gardener, and the defendant a Mr Douglas, the owner of some ewes which were depasturing in a paddock a few hundred yards from the Chinaman's premises. It appeared that on a certain Saturday the Chinaman's little dog — a mongrel terrier six months old — in company with another " dog friend," wandered into the paddock where Mr Douglas' sheep were grazing, and began to chase and otherwise worry and annoy the ewea. Mr Douglas, who lives close by, saw what was going on and went to a neighbour's house to get a gun wherewith to to remove the disturbing elements, but when he returned he found that the dogs, probably anticipating danger, had decamped and were on their way to a place of safety. Douglas cave chase, and coining up with his prey close to the Chinaman's house gave them a happy and quick despatch. The Chinaman at once consulted his lawyer, the result being that Douglas was sued for £10, the alleged value of the terrier. Douglas brought a cross action claiming £18 for damage done to his ewes, and both cases were by consent heard together. The learned counsel for "John," in opening the case, dwelt at some length on the virtues of th/ 9 deceaaed puppy, and stated that his client would prove that his dog could sic up on his hind logs, whistle tunea, smoke a pipe, stand on his head, and last but not least that he was a good ratter. Ho also stated that " John " and " Toby " — for that waa the dog's name " welly " fond of one .another Wanganui Herald, Volume XXVII, Issue 8266, 4 September 1893, Page 2