The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1880-12-28 00:00:00

A VERT PAINFUL DOIIII3TIC DIANA.

James Burbidge e. Emmanuel Knight—Kr. Barnett for
plaintiff, Kr. Howard for defendant. —Claim for £5O for
goods, money lent, b toed and lodging, and for damages
IT reason of defendant having converted t his own house
• certain piano —Bat his Honour paid there was nothing
about goods sold and delivered, the smite was one
trespass and trover.-11-. Burnett said Mr. Burbidge
bad tran.ectiona eith Mr. W. H. Ward, who had borrowed
on the 6th of N vember ilk he before owing for goods,
ke., odd, goring a piano as security ; but Mr. Knight
cams is and took away the piano, on which account 1:50
damages was claimed. —Kr. James Burbidge, of the New
lon, Wyke, said Kr. W. H. Ward, during 1890 had trans-
actions with him, plaintiff having sold him liah and bay,
lent him money, and boarded and lodged him, and on tith
November witness lent him £lO more, he owing DS odd
before, and defendant lodged a piano with him, which he
said had cost him ad While he went away Kr. Knight
and Mt. Ward came and took away the piano, and he,
coming home, found his wife in tears. A certificate wee
produced that the wife mid not come: but Mr. Howard
admitteri all the facto se steed of the piano's removal.—
Br Kr. Howard: Plaintiff did not arrange to go to America
with defendant, nor did ho think of it. Kr. Ward's wife
was Mr. Knight's daughter, and she had broken up her
home, and advertised the goods for sale. Some silver
Plato was not brought to the home at tbe same time aa
the piano. There had bees contra "mounts between plaintiff
and Kr. Ward: but they had had • settled amount, and
• balanos semen. He. Ward had not hauled AM for
plaintiff; Nit he had cut his grass, and for that he had an
acre of erodes. Had not had • settled amount with Mr.
Ward. Hi. 'rite went away from him, sod he was
summooed to Gorchtuter Rel, had no money, and
borrowed £lO of Mr. Burbidge.—By Mr. Burnett: Them
farming accounts spoken of by Mr. Howard had nothing
to do with the matter; they were settled beam—Mr.
' Howard first alleged that the piano wu completely the
property of Kr. Height, and under those circumstoomis he
had a right of reception. Again he laid down that if the
loss might be readily supplied by the purchase of a similar
article in the market, the damage would be the market
value of a similar piano—His Honour: The damages
would dow out of the detention: MGM young lady might
be prevented from charming the ears of her visitors on
account of the removal of the piano.—Mr. Burbidge:
That is the case, sir.—Mr. Howard continued that Mr.
Knight purchased the piano for • granddeughter of his
whom be was going to adopt, and Mr. Ward became very
unfortunate is business, the piano was in Mr. Knight's
custody; but he allowed it to go to his daughter's house
for his granddaughter to play on. He afterwards lowed
' the piano had been taken to Kr. Borbidge's whereon Mr.
, Knight, with two puttee in mien daylight, watt
and took back the piano to Mr. Knight's custody. It
was only valued at £lO now, and Mr. Howard urged
that Mr. Knight bad a right to do what he had dom.
—His Honour said this was • gift MM. Mon not
reduced into possession, the property not having lett
the giver. Why didn't they have a jury. Mr.
Burnett said that Juries are not frequent in this
circuit —The Judge: They have not been ; but there is no
meth why they should not be—Mr. Emmanuel Kaiak
defendant, said his only child married Mr. Ward, who bad
retried on • considerable farm mar Biandford. In
December, 1874, he purchased this piano of Kr, Upjohn,
and paid Mk Al that time be had a grand-daughter
Emily Knight Ward, daughter of his daughter sad Mr.
' Ward. ini• had been 11l at hie hoote, and they Immo
very total of her, and the mother always said she should
and lent it
come and live with her gruntased this pian-parents when she had done
schooling. On that be purcho.
to Emily Knight Ward, for her use: I. sent It to his von-
in-law's hones; but he did not eve it to either of the
parents. In February last, Mr. Ward wag unfortunate,
went into liquidadon, and the piano wee brought from
his to defendant's home' it was brought by Mr.
Ward's WSPOD end harlot even the truth, not claiming
It, and it remain till April. Hie daughter and children,
and Kr. Ward also, came to his house for some time, and
he had to support the whole lot The wife and °bitten
remained midi April; but Mt. Ward loft a week or in
before. Witness took show" for them at Wyke, of Kr.
John Groves, brewer, and let it them. The piano
did not go at first to the home • but after
some time William Ward come with his little
daughter after the Diane He had refused to let there
have it ; hat they talked his wife over and had it—The
Judge: A man can elareys revoke a gift, unless it is
reamed into possession—Defendant cautioning, said. on
November 3rd, his granddaughter, godly Knight Ward
came to his home, and said "Granter, granfer„.you had
better come, for father is tarring mother so bad. and be
went and took them to his home. He never gave them
the plane —By Mr. Burnett: Never gave Burbidge notice
the piano belonged to the defendant, he went and asked
the wife for it fibe reolied—"lt is nothing to do with no;
it is hired here by • lira Cook." He went up and also his
daughter, recognised the piano, and took it away. Wben
Ward was selling off his geode, defendant put the bailiffs
in his home. The piano was not there then, for it was
only ten days or • fortnight ego. The piano was not given
to his daughter or gaughter.—Ward warn then sworn,
and said be was "In a very good state of preservation" at
Bithdford Perm. His wife warded a piano, and they
wrote to Mr Geisha about a etiondhand good piano.
ignominy Kr. Knight bought the pion°, and made it •
present to the whole of the family, and witness sent his
horses and waggon for it Afterwards he brought it back
with me other goods to Kr. Knight's comidering it his
own. He owed la is. 64. to Mr. Baratta", end delimited
the piano with him an security. Cross-examined: Pod-
tively denied what had been said about the child they
had not a very good way of *bowing they loved the child.
The grandfather did not buy the piano for the child.
West into liquidation at Blandford, hot did not give up
the piaao.—The Judge t Every stick of yours, and every
shilling you hod peened to your anditon by liquidetien ;
you had no didii to keen baok a vslusble &die like a
YOU woald e
ltki have best l heiable for irs "been liable to • proses Wen, and aws.wo receirinr it. if ft bad been
team —Ward I had not a lot of creditors at Bland ford ;
I was demist away from ftlandford fetus—The Jades
said be should have bee* glad to have had the assistance
of • jury, to decide which had told the truth —Mr.
Barnett: it is oath against ostb.—Mr. Howard: Not
exactly so, for I have the wife hern—The Judge: If he
hie been in liquidation, the piano bottom& to the trustee,
and be had no right to give It e_p.
_You canard &Wit
ao goods
d wofhaithethicferietora:" aTwosyWatt irpr have,
In
r.
Barnett; The liquidation was a featly arrangement —Has
Honour said he knew of no liquidation but according to
the law of the land, sadtdded : Looking st the relation
between the parties, I believe that the defended has
premd his asen_i me diet In his bank book is an entry
of muse& d PO foe the pMno, and he swears he bought
It with the motive of giving it Ms grooddaneder. The
gift was revocabis until the madirer wag IT or ld
years of age, and he revoked it. I be that be bee told
me the boort truth, and there must • Verdict In his
favour. As to costa, Borbidge In an Innocent man:
I he has lost his money. • fraud has been per-
, Nitrated upon him' and I don't think it is a case
where tome ought!. be pressed for against Barbidge.
I Mr. Howard left that point entirely to the Judge, and a
verdict was returned for defendant, without °rota.
In • tees is which Mr. Hanna was toe plaintiff. and Kt
Weftford for defendant, but width was sttottrowl. the
Joao said be bad found In his poodles it we. womb to

get • vitamin out of the 0114161 e. op: it VIVI Ulm taking
a broad frun Lb. burning; you of ton burnt your angers.

Peelle= PT DEPUTY.
fieronel Gird,. K. T. Borland, an edjourood am, was
• claim by afarm tr, of Goiek.rel-roed, aminet a bender,
who pleaded • set-off. Plaintiff said ha lent Mr.
Ragland a horse and cart, but they did sot Wee what tim
charge was to ho; he charged 6s. a-day.—Dsfendant said
till admitted liming reodved • roworkoi.—TboJodge:
Re said: I received a eovedge from Kr. Butt but it was
for work dose for him.—Kr. W. Batt said no gale God.
I. Deeember, 78, • goverign, cm moment of work dooe for
Iturland.-11r. 6a.4 mid he refused to Mal brick for
itegiand ; but Kr. Bott said be never bought any
Gard tem« and worded him far it, baying ram* ti hire.
Perhaps. le hiaraw —Mr. Zeeland produced hie hell. uith
detailed items of the rt-off. amounting to 7a—Kr. Batt
"1"'"d that Klillad wea building • row of houses. and
they were financing him ; that was why he paid the £l.
and he also Mid vonte hundreds of eom..—Sudgnmat for
defendant, ants-3a. dl. a.I 'wed.