MAGISTERIAL.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 1663, 15 September 1887, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

ASHBURTON-THURSD I V (Before Mr John Olllvier, R M ) SSIZING OATILB.

B. Roddick was charged on the infor Button of Alex. Tamer with havinj Illegally entered on to land, the property of oomplainant, and with having threa tened complainant, wherefore the latte: prayed to hare the defendant bound cvai to keep the peace —Mr Caygill for com plalnanr, Mr Clayton for defendant—, Alex. Tamer, the complainant, said thai lie lived at the Ashborton Forks on free hold land. He had also some land lessee from Mr Herring. On September 9 early In the morning, witness heard hit cattle and sheep making a noise, and looking out he saw four horsemen driving them along the road. Witness went out. •nd with a great deal of trouble recovered the oattle. Ruddiok also endeavored tc take the iheep away, saying he wai working by his solicitor's orders, but witness, with the assistance of a boy whe eat the wires m the fence, got them •gain. Ruddlck and his son, Physio and Price, were the men who tried to drive the cattle away. They said that they wen instructed by the lawyer. Had Mked defendant to show any title to the land, but he waa unable to do so. Witbmi had shown his title to the defendant Thin wai od Aogaat 29. Defendant hid disturbed witness since the ocoaiion he had described. On Sunday, the 11th, defendant with four other men lit the tussock feed on defendant's place. Roddick himself lit the fire, but the men rode away before witness got within speaking distance. On the 9th witness came into town, and during the time he was absent from home his oattle were impounded by the defendant. — Mr , Clayton renewed an application, made at the opening of the cue, for an adjournment for a week, but the Magistrate did not see his way to grant the application.— By Mr Clayton : When witness bought the farm he did cot know that Ruddick bad been the previous occupier. — The witnees was crossexamined at some length as to Ruddfck's first visit on August 27ib. Ruddick claimed to have a right to portion of the leased land. Witness denied obtaining a lease from Ml Herring, because he heard 11 Kuddick was out of Lyttelton " Wjtntss made particular enquiries at the Land Office as to whether Ruddick had anything to do with the land Taey knew nothing about Roddick there, and eaid that Mr Herring waa the holder of the land,— Robert Fleming, a youih Id the employ of Turner, gave evidence as to defendant's attempt on September 9 to remove complainant's oattle and sheep— ln cross-examination, the witness said that Ruddick had on one occasion claimed the reserve and said that he would drive Turner's cattle off— Joseph Tait, and Charles Burnard gave evidence. The latter cut the wires of the fence so that Turner could get the sheep back on to his property*. While the witness was thns engaged Ruddiok stood over him with a stirrup iron, but Tnrner stood by fa ease the defendant should strike witness. — John Orr, who had sold the land to Turner, produced documents, and gave evidence that Ruddick had by noncompliance wlih conditions of leaae, forfeited any claim to the !and — In reply to Mr Clayton, the witness said that Ruddick had no more title to the land than the man In the moon. Roddick had said that he had a title to the land, but witness was not altogether sure that he was sincere — Edward Herring, manager of the Alford Station, was called.— Mr Clayton asked for the production of the witness's authority to appear. Ihe witness cou 3 not. produce them that day, &s be h»d not them with him— The case was adj -uraed for a week, to allow of the prodcotion of the documents, — Ruddick was bound over to keep the peace m the ma&nt me, himself m £100 and two sureties of £50 each. CITIL CABES Henry v Doyle, claim £2 6s— Jadgment by default for amount claimed and costs. Baylls v W. Reecs, judgment summons, £i lit — Mr Outhbertson ior judgment creditor.— £l had been paid on account, thui leaviDg 11s. An order made for Immediate payment of this lla with coßta £1 2i, m default 96 hours imprisonment. Hardy and Co v I. R 0. O. Graham, •laim £25 3s Id— Mr Pnrnell for plaint ff. Mr Ouinbertson for defendant. 'ihe claim was one for goods supplied from the BaktJa and Methven branches of plaintiff's business. The claim was admitted by defendant, bat he alleged that plaintiff bad agrsed to take out In stakes 0 A. O. Hardy and John Orr, members of the lite firm of Hardy and Co, gave evidence —It was denied, on behalf of the plaintiff. that any arrangement to take stakes had been entered into. Mr Orr stated that as Mr Graham represented that such an agreement had been made, he took his word and agreed to take out the amount m stakes provad they were delivered at once. He subsequently ascertained from Mr Hardy that no agreement had been entered into, and as the stakes were not delivered before the season was ended, witness telegraphed to defendant to the effect that as the stakes had not been delivered, and as the Methven business had been disposed of, the order would be cancelled.— The defendant maintained that he arranged to take the account m stakes, and he had ■applied Borne stakes. "When he entered into the subsequent arrangement with Mr Orr, it was unconditional, witness thinking that the delivery of the stakes would be •xtended over about 3 m nths. Besides, the weather m the bush during the fortnight intervening between the giving of the order, and its cancellation was most unfavorable for getting stakes out —The defendant's manager depoaed to interTiewing the plaintiff's manager at Methven on several occasions, m reference to the delivery of stakes The latter said that he had plenty, but would inform witness when more were wanted. — Judgment for plaintiff. r [Left sitting.]