sale were wrongivl nis jusignient must therefore be for the plaintiffs, 'The usual form would be for' returning the pony; but that is now impossible as it is known that some months after these events the pony died, As to the defendant Hearne; he merely acted as auctioneer: he is not a professional auctioneer; he is a gentleman who voluntarily' undertakes this work asa. man' with knowledge of ponies, ete. It is hard that he should be brought in: the pony was never in his pat session, save sis auctioneer, nor is there any evidence that he'delivered it to anyone. I cannot see why any judgment should be entered against him, and I enter judg-" ment for him with costs, As to the defendant Russell: he is in a different position, he deliberately bought the pony on behalf of himself and others at a time when he knew there. was a protest being by the admitted owners'of the pony before the sale as to the right to sell. He bought at his own risk and there is no doubt that, had the pony remained with him, or under his control, an order could go for its xeturh'against him, The Question of Damages As to damages, it is to be ree membered that no one hi heed that the proceeds. of the. a @ld_not go for the benefit of the platntifte. or their creditors. The any cost. the plaintitty its value must have been increased by ite successes in October; even after the unsuccessful November meeting. Mr. Zimmerman. is willing to trent its Value as $600, AY the same time T am not billd to the uncertain value of a race pony. A reserve of, $600 at the auction was fixed jor after consideration.
'At the same time 1 feel confident that the proceedings of October 18 ware vary Likely' to prevent: people from bide ding, knowing the risky that might* bo"run, It is impossible to take into account the problematical wit nings of the pony had it remained under the care of the plaintiff understand the ease of Ed-monsoon v. Muttall (84°L. J. C. 102) the fact that the money obtained at the sale-on October 18 was used for the creditors of the plaintiffs does not mitigate the damages. The plaintiffs are entitle ed to an order for return of the pony; and as that ie now imposile ble T fx its value "at $750" and sive judgment for them against the defendants Major and Russell for that amount with costs, I find the story hard to undo stand: especially remembering th ion of Mr. Major in forcing eon October 18, expressly defeated the object he had in view when he stayed the execution on October 18, A'Judge's Duty also cannot-understand! why the $200 wan not. collected for the benefit of the: creditors: nor why the: $164.90 was retained; especially in face of Mrs. Taylor's request for it on Novertber 1 and of th subsequent settling up of th affairs by Mr. Major. T'cannot see in any way. it can be said to be part of Sudleial funeton to, see arrangement like that October 9: is carried: out ince "after the raees* no date mentioned. Nor indeed do I ye" it is in any' part of the duties of a Consul: it is up to the judgment creditors, "Te was sug gested in Court that it was the Judge's duty to protect' creditors whb bhve obtained' judgments and Tore entirely. tie Jatt cgtee ly. 's duty is" best described in' the judicial oath: "te do justice between man and man without fear or favour, sffeetion' or lif wil" AS far'ay Consul is concerned T° tuke it lits" Primary function is'téwatd'his own nationals and Ko is" to promote Teconeiliation ab' far' ai" he. can? here'as Mr. Mejor' told: me' he thought he waw: doing' the' best he could for' all" coheerned, especially [femdunt to platntim:
tted to- judgment; Which' was accordingly entered,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.