RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 4018, 12 January 1876, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Wednesday, January 12. (Before J. Bathgate, Esq , E.M.) Knowles v. Alves.—Claim for wages, &c. Tbij case had previously been partly heard, and after the examination of one witness had bevn taken it was further adjourned till the 26th inst. G>o. Munro v. Mrs Chase.—Claim L2O for that defendant broke and entered into plaintiff’s land in Cargill street and cut down and converted to her own use a quick hedge there situated.—ln giving judgment in this case, previously heard, his Worship said The defendant has been sued for L2O damages, for cutting down a hedge forming a boundary fence. The defendant has proved that the hedge in question was planted sixteen years ago, by her son, within her boundary fence, an.l that she has trimmed it and exercised other acts of ownership ever since without challenge, till within the last two years, when the plaintiff, who had acquired the adjoining property disputed her right. No recent survey made from d ita which cannot determine positively the original boundary can prejudice th < defendant’s right of possession. In the circumstances the presumption is in her favor, the re d points in dispute being the title to the land on winch the hedge is planted, tbe jurisdiction _of the Court is ousted. The plai tiff will therefore be nonsuited, oa the plea of no jurisdiction.—Mr MVKeay presumed that no coats would be allowed, plaintiff having been put out of Court on tbe mound of no jurisdiction—HJs Wor ship : Well, that is the rule, but it is a very hard is a, peculiar one, for before I cau make up my mind as to jurisdiction, the evidence must be taken on all sides. I may state that even although 1 had jurisdiction, the plea of damage to the hedge is in my opinion unfounded. The hedge had been out down by defendant, under the belief that she is only exercising her right and uo injury ia done to it, rather the ieverse. Plaintiff non-suited without co.ts. [Left sitting.]