DOGS DESTROY SHEEP

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 1, Issue 2, 24 April 1939, Page 6

DOGS DESTROY SHEEP

FARMERS CLAIM (Continued from Page 5) plaintiff con fused several dates, but eventually placed tlie second worrying on January 7. » Mr Otlev suggested he meant January 3 and Mr Barry objected that Mr Otley was cross-examining his own witness. BAD MEMORY. Melville said lie had a bad mem. ory for dates. Continuing he said 10 or, 11 sheep were killed and a few worried on the second occasion. There was a third worrying on December 7. His error was pointed out to him and he said he meant that the third worrj-ing occurred on January 7. On this occasion with Mr Swancy he approached to within 10 yards of the setter and saw it attacking the sheep. There were about 30 killed on this date. Plaintiff added that when they interviewed Plamus and told him what his dog had done he went ovei to it and put his foot to it, saying "You 1? When Plamus and Hunter came up on Sunday morning plaint i>i took them to the scene of the at. tack. He showed them th e carca.sc of a lamb which was the first animal he had found dead on December 27. There was nothing but skin and bones and Plamus said it had been dead for months and refused to 100k any further. Melville said he could show the defendants many more within a few yards, but lh e otter was not accepted. Melville said he bad made his last tally in November before shearing. He had 1752 sheep then. After the worrying "there were 1651, including worried sheep which subsequently died. Five sheep had been killed for mutton and three had d ! ed a natural death, the balance being the sheep he claimed tor. A GOOD SHOT. To Mr Barry plaintiff said he knew he hit the dog. He saw it jump im! yelp when he fired at it. He w as a kangaroo hunter when a boy. Itknew there were other liver and white setters in but be was certain that Piamus' dog was the guilty one. Both Plamus' ir.'.l Hunter's dogs were distincti\e. .Itsaid that Plamus heard him identify the dog and point out the bullet wound. It was right through tho neck and was not a tick buriow. Plaintiff denied that when defend, ants were inspecting the skins of the dead sheep he attempted to include the skin of a sheep killed for mutton and that his grandson, checked him. Mr Barry quoted figures used by Melville in his evidence and claimed that they disagreed with those in the statement of claim and th g leu to an argument. REPROVED BY MAGISTRATE Witness said he would give -the figures himself without Mr Bari\ trying to "wangle" them. Mr Walton: Don't say counsel is trying to ''wangle" them. Plaintiff turned to the bench and interposed some remark as Mr Walton was speaking. "Don't try to be smart. Don't adopt that tone or speak when I i l "' speaking or I will you and your case put out of court" added Mr Walton firmly. Melville: I am not smart. I am very simple. It is more ignorance than trying to be smart. He continued that there were 51 sheep killed outright, destroyed, or died later through the first worry, ing, 11 after the second and 31 after the third. FARMER'S EVIDENCE. Middleton R. Swaney, manager of the Ngatiawa Scheme Block > followed plaintiff. He saw the dogs on the 27th leaving the Ngatiawa block. The smooth_haired dog belonged to Mr Hunter. He had seen it several times,. He said that seven sheep were killed on the Ngatiawa block and he confirmed the story of the other attacks. He agreed that the carcases of sheep killed by dogs decayed very rapidly in hot weather. He thought the sheep killed could be valued at 22s each. The lambs were worth an average of 15s. In his opinion the sheep on the pro. perty would suffer to the extent of about Is 6d a head through the ten days of worrying. He knew the tion had been bad and that plaintiff had men sleeping out among the sheep. Since the last worrying he had not seen the dogs. DOGS IDENTIFIED. John, Melville, grandson of plaintiff, said that on the 27th December he saw the dogs worrying tlit* sheep. He knew the black and fa' T ~" " * ■"= »h.. r.i*'

occasion lie saw over 40 dead sliecp. They dressed about HO and skinned about 30. On the second occasion he saw the same two dogs and saw 11 dead sheep. The same two do 14s attacked the sheep o n the 7th. Seven sheep Avere killed outright and they had to kill some later. He confirmed his grandfather's account of defendants' visit t 0 the farm. Hunter said very little. Ho had told his grandfather on the first occasion that one dog was Hunters but he agreed that they waited until the third attack before the}' did anything. Melville repeated that he skinned about 30 sheep on the ground after the first attack. The witness avos silent when Mr Barry pointed out that his grandfather had stated that only four or five Avere skinned there. He agreed that he had stopped his grandfather from including one skin among those shown to defendants. After further evidence the hearing wa.s adjourned until the next sitting of the court.