RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2609, 28 June 1871, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

This Day. ([Before A. 0. Strode, Esq., E.M.) Cunningham v. Fraser,—A claim for 4 a ' mages for impounding cattle, L 3 9s <Jd. Mr Howorth for the plaintiff ; Mr Bathgate for the defendant. From the evidence it appeared that the alleged trespass was upon nnfenced ground. Judgment for the plaintiff, L 3 9s tid, with costs. White v. Mackenzie. - A claim for L2O, damage? for removing a fence. Mr Stewart for tfa,e plaintiff; Mr Harris for the defendant. As’stated foy Mp Stewart, the defendant haying taken a'contract % supplying the Government with wood, applied £<* c leave to go through plaintiff's groupd, .consent ,bo which was given on condition of a fence being erected. Ho cleared a portion shewn upon a plan produced, enclosed a paddock, and fenced five chains with the timber taken off the land. The fence was pulled down afterwards without the plaintiff’s knowledge, ,ap4 }vith the exception of one load of wood removed, thus throwing the ground open apef allowing }m cattle to wander. The value of the fence w£S about a pound a chain, but he had beep put to great expense through having t,Q fasten up, to their injury as milking cows. Ip reply to Mr Harris, the witness said the land was surveyed, fopt foe did not know the boundary pegs until shown by

the defendant Mackenzie.Edfcthe defence it was alleged that, took possession of tb6' land, noither':-plaintilf nor defendant knew the boundaries, of their land; that the fence had bean erected in error on a district road, and that he had a right to remove it, especially as no part of the timber was taken off plaintiff’s land. Judgment for plaintiff L 5 and costs,