MAGISTERIAL.
ASHBURTON— FBIDAY.
(Before Mr H. 0. S Baddeley 8.M.) CIVIL OASES. W. H. Rule v H and J. Sprott, claim £40, »nd Same v Same olaim £20 for damage to grass feed etc., through defendaot'f action m camping on plaintiff a land at Pendsrvei. — There was a crocs action, Sprott Bros, v W. fl. Role, claim £60 — Mr Parnell appeared for Mr Hale and Mr WildlDg for Messrs Sprott Broß. After we went to press yeaterday additional evidence was given by B. McDonald, W. Pfnteon, and J. Bale to prove that Sprott's sheep had eaten off the whole of the rape m a paddock containing 225 aoreß. The first-named witness and J. Qu'gley, a farmer at Dromore, testified that at the time the rape was worth abont 33 an acre. H . Bnd J. Sprott and D. Hampton, for the defence, averred that the damage was -caused by Bale m removing the wires from a dividing fence* They also stated that Bnle'a sheep had been Been feeding lv the paddock. At five o'oiock Bis Worship announced that he wonld take the cross-acMou next Ooutt day, and give judgment on the three cases after Y earing the whole of them. In consequence of the lengthy evidence all the other cases net down for hearing bad also to be adjourned.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AG18870402.2.21
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1523, 2 April 1887, Page 3
Word count
Tapeke kupu
218MAGISTERIAL. Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1523, 2 April 1887, Page 3
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.