SUPREME COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3099, 24 January 1873, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

CIVIL SITTINGS.

This Day. (Before bis Honor Mr Justice Chapman.)

M'Coomb v. Low.—ln this action, plaintiff sought to recover L 2,000 damages for alleged false imprisonment in August last, and 1.500 special damages for loss of trade in consequence. Mr James Smith, with Mr Wilson appeared for plaintiff, and Mr .Barton, with Mr Haggitt, for defendant. Stuart M‘Coomb, plaintiff, said he resided Blacks for about ten years, and carried r.n business as butcher and cattle dealer. The defendant had two or three stations at Blacks, and was a member of the (inn of Campbell and Low. Some time ago he dealt with defendant for stock. He had another butcher’s shop at a place called Tinker’s Cully. in July last, he had a transaction with Campbell and l ow. A few weeks before that he purchased 697 or 679 ewes from Mr Glassford, the proprietor of a station in that district. He took delivery of them at the station. A number of the sheep stray.d on to defendant’s rim. He informed defendant of the fact, and defendant replied that he would have to sell them to him, or pay 5s a bead for the glass. Witness then said that that was more than the sheep were worth, and that he would sell them. Defendant replied that he would give him a shilling a head for them, and after a while he said he would give two shillings for them, and asked if they all had got away. Witness said, “No, about 100 or 200; but L cannot tell you the quantity” He off.red to guarantee 200 if defendant would pay him for them, and defendant said he would not pay until the cutting and tailing time. He then rec ived the receipt produced for the sheep. About the 19th of August, Constable MTlann came to his place and arrested him on the charge of sheep stealing, and conveyed him to Black’s and locked him up. He was locked up all night. The following day he was token to Clyde by the same constable, and again locked up, with a Chinaman. At 5 o’cl.ck he was bailed and liberated. He immediately consulted Mr Wilson, and then went home. Three days after he attended the Court at Clyde to answer the charge on which he had been arrested. He was remanded on bail, and a peared on a subsequent day. On both days defendant appeared and gave evidence against him. He had no occasion to call witnesses on either day and was discharged. He was put to considerable expense by the affair. He .thought f om L3O to I 40. His business was considered injured by his being held up to the world as a sheep stealer. L 2,000 would not cover the damage he had sustained. He lost a contract and Lis business at Tinker’s Gully, and claimed special damages in consequence. A week or ten days before he was arrested, ho was offered Ll5O for the shop and goodwill Now the goodwill was valueless. About three weeks after the trial at Clyde, defendant came to Blacks and called on him. Defen dant said, “I have come to apologise and make a settlement with you.” He said, “It is too late ; you have tried to ruin my family, and now you have come at the last moment.” Defend .nt then said, “ I will let you run your own cattle on my run for five years, free of charge, and have the fees for all stray cattle, and that will be worth 1.500 a year for you. He replied, “ L don’t want to be bail friends with my neighbors,” and defendant said, “ f you don’t settle with mo. I will be your enemy.” He did not settle with him. Sometime last month he was requested to attend at defendant’s run and witness the mustering. He went, and ■while in the yards defendant asked him if ho hj id got any of his sheep. He icplied in the negative. Defendant called him on one side and said, “ Have you heard anything from your solicitor.” He said, “No,” when defendant remarked, “You ought to, because 1 have written to mine in order to bring about a settlement. Ihe next day he identified 2Q7 of the ewes he bought from Glassf >rd. Defendant was not present, but Mr Taylor, the overseer, was there. Two hundred of the sheep were returned to defendant’s flock, and the remaining ninety-seven were taken away by him on the following day.—J ross-examiued : He had not transacted business lately from Mr Low. He did not tell Mr Low that the strayed sheep were the balance of the purchase from Glassford. He distinctly told him that bo had other sheep on the commonage, in charge of a shepherd, branded in the same way as the strayed sheep. He was positive he never said to Constable M'Gann that he had sold all the sheep that were left. At the time he received the receipt from defendant he did not t ;II him that the whole* of the sheep he bought from Glassford had strayed on to his ron He proposed paying for the grazing of the sheep. Mr Low nevercha r ged h’ui Mith having allowed sheep to stray on to his run with the idea of getting*the use of the station run* there. He never knew that John Hutchison was in trouble for cattle stealing. The contract produced was written and signed by Hutchison in his presence. Cox was present at the time. The contract was dated August I3th, 1872 ; and it was in consequence of defendants action against him that he was not able to fulfil the contract, and. therefore he sought for Special dama es. Ho had twenty-one sheep iu his yard, a few days before he was arrested, withjfilassford’s brand on them. He brought them fr>»m LGk’s paddock. He did not take them from Campbell and Low’s run. He never at any jip® took sheep from defendant's nw.

He was certai nth at the twenty-one sheep never were on defendant’s run. The receipt was dated July 9th, and on the 12th he took about forty sheep from Disk's paddock. This number included the twenty-one. He had the time between three and lour hundred sheep in the paddocks. He had not adopted Glassford’s ear mark, neither had he earmarked any of his sheep. At the time he sold the sheep to Mr l.ow ho had sheep on Glassford’s run About a week before this he was summoned by Glass ford for trespass. He was charged on a former occasion with stealing a boast from the property of Mr Cutten, but the charge was not proved. The reason why he did not sue Mr (,’ntten for damages was that he had not means t > do so. He had made over his property to his wife, not long since, but it w as not in anticipation of an adverse verdict in this case. He bought the cattle branded D M and a bar (tlfe skins of which were found in his yard) from John Cole Chapel, Before commencing to slaughter the sheep purchased from Classford, he did not give notice to the police, because it was not necessary, as the sheep were intended only for sheep food. He had not yet got all the sheep he bought from Glass fonl. The she pskins the police found in his yard belonged to twenty-one sheep he brought from Lisle’s paddock. (Left sitting.)