SUPREME COURT.
Wednesday, November 5. (Before his Honor Mr Justice Chapman and a Special Jury.) WHITE V. M'KELLAR. David M'Kellar, one of the defendants, was cross-examined by Mr Barton at some length. He considered that he was entitled to joint ownership in the whole run until a division had been made. Seeing that they refused to come to au arrangement, and that he had been occupyingjthe worst part of the run, he did not see any good reason why he should not go and occupy a better portion of it. Sometime before the arbitration, Mr Calder ashed him not to interfere with the plaintiffs. That was in the year ISG9. Witness then left the matter in the hands of Calder, who represented his brother. He denied ever having any idea of driving plaintiffs inbq the Bankruptcy Court, and thereby get possession of their run. They (plaintiffs) were very unpopular in the neighborhood. They lived a life of poverty and seclusion. John M‘Kellar deposed to having told plaintiffs that they had brought cattle on to the other end of the run, and at the same time offered to take which ver end they (plaintiffs) chose. They refused to settle the matter in that way, stating that defendants had no right to the run at all. He then proposed that they should tix a boundary, and he understood them to assent to the Bond River being fixed. He afterwards heard that the Whites turned the his shepherd out of the hut. Witness subsequently spoke to Mr iaylor White about turning the shepherd out of the hut. Not having succeeded in obtaining any satisfaction, he (witness) told them they would not be allowed to have the use of the sheds for shearing. Witness and his party afterwards vi ent to the sheds, and found plaintiffs with their sheep there. Witness believed he said to White he had acted very childishly. 'Hie reply made was that, as they could not get the shed they would resort to other means to get their rights! They drove their sheep away. There was no pretence whatever for saying that the sheep were driven away by defendant’s part}', Hugh M’lntjre gave corroborative evidence. (Left sitting.)
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD18731105.2.11
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Evening Star, Issue 3342, 5 November 1873, Page 2
Word count
Tapeke kupu
367SUPREME COURT. Evening Star, Issue 3342, 5 November 1873, Page 2
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.