RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT, CLYDE.

Dunstan Times, Issue 773, 9 February 1877, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT, CLYDE.

—o— FudrUAuv Ist, 1877. (Before W. L, Simpson, Esq,, 11.M.) W. M’Eudoo v. John Duudas.—Claim, LSO, damages to fences and growing crops. —Verdict for EG ss, and 30s costa. February sth, 1877. Police v. John Glen.—Drunk and disorderly.—Fined 10s, or 24 hours’ imprisonment in Clyde Gaol. Polioo v. John Brown.—Drunk and disorderly.—Fined 10s,oo k 24 hours’ imprisonment. Same v. Same.—Resisting Police in execution of duty.—Case dismissed. Same v. Same.—lndecent [exposure-. 48 hours’ imprisonment. Same v. H. Clay.—Drunk and disorderly. —Fined 10s, or 24 hours’ imprisonment. Same v. Same.—Furious riding.—Fined 20s and costs, or 48 hours’ imprisonment. Same v. Same.—Maliciously damaging Government property. Fined ss, tho amount of damage, ss, or 24 hours’ imprisonment. George Jesen was’chargedjwith stealing the sum of 18a, and a pair of trousers valued at 20s.—Sentenced to two months’ imprisonment in Clyde Gaol with hard labor. February 8. J. C. Chappie v. J. White.— Claim LIS, value of two pigs killed by defendant’s wife. J, C. Chappie sworn, deposed. -On the 22nd ultimo was told by my man that defendant’s wife had killed two ofmyjpigs. I went to defendant’s farm, and recognised them by certain spots on the [fore legs, and by their general appearance; they were lying dead amongst somej'growing potatoes, the ground is only partly fenced. After I saw the pigs, I went to tho house, when Mrs White said she had killed themjbecause they were amongst jibe potatoes. On the 25th ultimo, when I served the, summons, tho defendant told me ho had notauthorised his wife to kill tho pigs, and had he been up (he was at home ill in bed with a bad leg) they would not have been killed, and he offered me LS compensation. The pigs were in young when last 1 saw them. I could not replace them for Lls. The defendant wanted the matter settled by arbitration, to which I agreed, but the arbitrators appointed would not act because Mrs White told them I had instructed her to shoot them. 1 only told hereto shoot a hog if he troubled her, or on her ground. Mrs White, sworn, said—On the 12th nit. eight pigs were amongst the potatoes. I put them into the yard, and sent word to Mr Chappie to at once remove them if they were his property. The pigs have repeatedly trespassed on to our ground, and on my telling Mr Chappie, he has told me to drive them away with the dogs, and shoot them. Plaintiff told me once to shoot the hog. 1 did not know who the pigs belonged to when I killed them. After I killed them I sent word to the Police, and also to the plaintiff. Cross-examined by plaintiff—The ground is not fenced. I never told anyone that the sows had young ones with them. Wm. Motherwell— On the 12th ult., at the request of Mrs White 1 called on plaintiff, and told him about her yarding eight pigs, and if they were bis to fetch them away. He told his man to go, and said if they were his he would summons her husband for yarding them. I said it was very hard to see a crop) destroyed and to have no remedy. He replied “ Impound them.” Afterwards ho said “ Shoot or dog them.” Cross-examined—l am sure you told me to shoot them. <l. White, sworn, said—l have seen the killed pigs. Cannot tell their value. Tho ground is not fenced ; other ground I have is fenced, hut the pigs in that are equally as troublesome as in the unfenced ground. 1 do not know if ever I saw the pigs alive. The plaintiff has fifty pigs running loose ovor tho flat. The Bench in giving judgment said defendant had no right to kill pigs on land that was unfenced. There was a special Ordinance under which pigs could be killed on fenced hands. Defendant said--Then pigs might do fifty or hundred pounds’ worth of damage, and the owner would not recognise them. Bench—ln this instance plaintiff has recognised the pigs, and you have your remedy in a civil case for damage done. Judgment will he for LlO, and costs 295, payment to bo made in three weeks. Glass v. Sloan. —Settled out of Court.

Fr.oiULTXE ! For the Tumi ani> Breath. —A few drops of the liquid * ‘ Floriino ” sprinkled on a wet tooth-brush produces a pleasant lather, which thoroughly cleanses the teeth from all parasites or impurities, hardens the gums, prevents tartar, stops decay, gives to the teeth a peculiar pearly-whiteness, and a delightful fragrance to the breath. It removes "all unpleasant odour arising from decayed teeth or tobacco smoko. ‘ ‘ The Fragrant Floriline,” being composed in part of Honey and sweet herbs” is delicious to the taste, and the greatest toilet discovery of the age. Price 2s fid, of all Chemists and Perfumers. Prepared by Henry C. Gallup, dO.'i Oxford St., London.