Feilding R.M. Court

Feilding Star, Volume VII, Issue 66, 12 November 1885, Page 2

Feilding R.M. Court

Wednesday, November 11 1885. (Before B: Ward^ Esq., R.M.) W. 8. Staite was charged with being 4runk in a public place. He pleaded guilty, and, fined 10s, in default 24 hoars ln^'ang&nui gpaL The fine was^at once paid. * Prior and Sandilandajc^W. Salisbury — Claim 11b 9d. Judgment for plaintiff with costs, 6r. - y- • ~ *- ■■'• W .^ Brown r Feaberion.— Olaim £11 10s 6d. Mr Prior for? plaintiff. Judgment for plaintiff. The amount to be paid- in -onar.iweek or- in d«faolt» 11 dajrf imprisonment, in Wanganui gaol. ■■' \"''x "." '*'"}**. ; v""".|-- , J. Hughey v G~Clarke.— Claim £4 10«/ M# Prior for plaintiff- I)ofett|iant conducted hpew^ case. *V ; John Hughey deposed to ihe;4|trr* cry of c©rt«h saclts Wchliff. -> *■' \ R. H. Whisker dejfcsid to delirery "about 15 sacks .of ch£s4p Mrs Clarke. ; Mrs Hughey gave evidence in supjport of the claim. r ' *'"' 'James Beattie Whisker evidence In 'support: (Mr John Robijuen j*ar fiere ej^edfrom ( the {Court, he being- somewhat dimonßtrai ■■ James McKeague was^examinea as ;to tha deHrery of the^saok*. neTer^rpeeived 1^ b^ r at ittyjiiiej [always counted. &* bags rwheV lie /jj£. !<*lved them; the u«u»itan| «J>«g iis 9lbf; wjmJ not Satwayfc |iref»nt when was brought; but niff Jwif ezwasi ; Mrs(^keg^*eetiaen<^lnsiipport. j OeoM|e CaArlce; asb» bl^fcmdiit; \i^iA^^^ *„,'!..:' a"^-;;*/* h-J only 36 sacks a^Urerea.' iq^Kud^nion^ ! wast gi*en fo^p|»intiflf for # 10», wilffi COBts, 31s 6d. ,> .:.-:.[ \«a'^ ' Manchester Boadl Boafii 4T^Henry Knott.— Claim £« r l9sJdi<MrStaite appeared for the defendant, ftn'd took !a prelimS'nary objectioti id th^y^m al the particulars wj^relj^^^ !coUec£isiot£e^ ;amounts daimedi ,#ere .now-^ie j the general raie: of 1663, £1; «s 4d, was Istruck out. Judgment foi* tha 'diffec. eh<ie, £7 V* lorf,- : 4nd >eoste:' r (Mrs Kribtt wa»VeryiTnnch diiarisfied with the Terdictr' aud rather scetfe 1 look' ' ' W v SteTen» t J.Tqrrier.^-plftlia£s': Mr Staite for U»e pfai^ilt, and Ifv jSandilandk for dofendaut. This was a <«se whtoh arose but of tbtimpeundr ing of certain cattle, and for^rreogf ully irembVingafenc*. f •-'•'■ ~*f "^r-vl /■; \ William Stermir deposed : f he knew John Turner, the poundkeepe^:* and the 1 8th. of. Octo>J^.. remo^uig fibre* rails from; a ffln^virs^^b^i^ across . th#ti road ; after^ 3 *he fence he^ went down?:ihe road : and seiaed ? head of cattlet wftfch fteldroV* !to the pound; had authority to erec'i the fen^e by the Boro^gK (authority ni^(iced)J n^e aiplica^ tion to tiie '^freU a fence across the'road ; tura^r remoivod 'thf fence ; have suffered norrdiphage) 'and would be satisfied if the!B»V*l| gate a Terdict for Is ; the cattlft at^he ,time of the seizur* irera bi^Uie xoad fenced in. ''■'- ■■■■'•''"■*■ ••«:T .■- -.:--.-it Q. C. Hill; Town derk< deposed: he remembered a re^lutibh Raised l»y the.BoroughC^unL^; jnfinW *ermiision to plaintiff to er§ct: a giate aerosa , Simon street; that res<ilutieo f had |ne^er,b»#fl,reaiiind#4.. ! ,..'i''..;i.V; "••■ :.\" 1 Plaintiff <waa nonsuited, ]aa*bf . Borough had no power to dose theistreei: W. Line r D. MeKentie,— Claim .£25. MrSandilaridsfdrphiJntiffandllr Esam for defendant. TM wSi a caw 'f^4w^^w. ; by;^ mrm *&& ] W. rinj^ deposed: He was a settler at Kiwitea* and defendant a neighbor ; : 'on? 21st August saw some tfray cattla on his land— a bull and' two «r thre* mor*; had a boll and mix«* cattle running «n hii land -plaintiff* bull was,on that day within a'substantial sU* fence— all stabbed e^cep^where there are two panels, in tKe oornejr of the paddock ; found defendant's bull in the paddack on; two oocasioni;; did not know how. he got in ; heard * smash and saw the bull on top of the fence, breaking it down and heading into the paddock where witness' bull was .(^.tKey appeared to agi«e : yei¥well ; : before he could get roatenal t6 mend the ; fence, th^two^bu^we^t, through the breach into another part of the land; tried to r> separate v them, but ' could not do so,; they remained in the ground titt the end of August ; heard a disturbance between the beasts in the middle of the afternoon ; saw defendant's bull run at that of witaeg* md roll him orer some logs; went be-^ twixt them and dogged defeHdant'a bull some distance into _ the bukh be- ; . longing ■' to witnem ; preyious' to this . the bull was healthy, and string; he nerar grazed after the accident; want to -»cc defendant after the buH was ... destroyed, but did not find him at home until the 4th of the monih ; told him his l)ull had destroyed that of witness then, took hia bull away ; both defendant ; and witness the dead bull but" found- no serious wounds; concluded h* had been injured internally; after he wa* v injured had hand-fed him ; valued tin bull at £2a;;jhewMa half Ve4Here- rford, three years old.last month; lost quite in looking after lam ; thf/. bull was shot ultimately; saw^JAe, shot fired; ooxuidered the neeeßsityforits death was oaused l.y defendant'^ bull. : Cross-examined ky Mr £uua : , Bp»at . about half his time; at Kiwiteia ,(a plan of the woperty was produced, on which plaintiff was examined); did not we defendant on the 2nd September; saw him on the .40} f saw no particular ma,rl?B on the dead bull ;. the biiil was not in low condition ; gave the bull two small bottles of castor oil ; thought ' he was injured internally aiid opening medicine would . do him good ; had ' seen Uie bulls fighting; did not send for defendant to see the bull again ; Pnnce had giyen it oatmeal -dtenchesj

did not send word to defendant that | he was going to destroy the bull ; had I some pigs turned in to eat the carcase ; j the hair was off the hide but no punc- j ture was visible ; did not know that | the selling value of first-class bulls was £3 »r £4 ; told defendant the bu ! was dead ; considered bis bull better than that of defendant. The Court here adjourned until 2 o'clock, when, on resuming — W. Line was re-exatuined : The bull was in fair condition when the accident happened ; could not tell which was tho hoarier bull. David I'riuce deposed : Was working for Mr Jacob in the Kiwitea; had known plaintiffs bull for about 2£ years ; plaintiff asked witness to go and look at it ; it was in fair condition but much tucked up, with a hump on -its back ; prescribed for it ; it seemed ptb be suffering from a bad strain; had ..had. some years' experience among 'cattle; thought plaintiff had treated the animal properly by giving it castor oil ; saw three marks on the side of the bull; it was worth from £12 to £15. Cross-examined : Thought it was the day after tho encounter he went to see it ; could not tell it had been fighting; the hump on the back would result from a blow ; had fed it on gruel and grass to keep it alive ; after it was dead saw the skin was disfigured; knew defendant's bull, which was the heaviest by a little, lower set, and rather stronger. A. W. Hedges, fanner, Kiwitea, knew both the parties to this action ; was called in to attend to plaintiffs .bull; gave a prescription, which he thought might do good ; the bull was ' worth, perhaps. £12 ot £15 ; knew defendant's bull to be on plaintiff's property ; it had also been on the land of witness ; never saw it jumping fences. Cross-examined: Was brought up as a fanner; defendant's bull was reasonably quiet ; none of them kad their back lines fenced ; never noticed plaintiff's cattle in defendant's place ; witness shot the beast; it was iujured inwardly, which probably caused the loss of appetite ; bulls nearly always fight ; they may run together for years and then tight; they were just like human beings. Heury Rutherford, butcher, Feild- . ing deposed: Had had mu> h experienced on managing cattle ; wheu a beast is ill the best thing to do is to open its bow t> is with cantor oil. for th« defence, Mi 1 K.ihiu (mll.il Donald McKenzie who dnpost'd : Was a fanner, resident iv tho Kiwitea ; received a message by his niece from plaiutiff, it was aftor dark on tho Ist B«pteml>er ; went to plaintiff's next morning )>otw«?u 8 and 9 o'clock ; went to look for his own bull in the afternoon; saw plaintiff's bull iv a paddock (colored green on the plan ;) th« fence is uot a secure one, and have soon catth) going through it; the only thing witness saw wrong with plaintiff's bull was that it was tucke I tip in the tally ; saw his owu bull on the .<rd iust. ; he had uo marks of a tight on him; saw plaiutiff, who said defendant's bull had knocked his ono into a ditch, frotu which lie had to get assistance to remove it ; when witness saw tho sick bull ho thought it had eaten something which had bound it up; nuvor nttid h* thought it had. boeu injured ; the value uf the dead beaut was about £3 ; Mr Barrow, of Kiwitea, hadsoldoueatthat price; never had received complaints of it beiug a fence-breaker. CroM-exuiinnod : Heard plaintiff •ay he had given £5 for the bull whon three days old ; if a cow is on the ether side the quietest bull will jump a fence sometimes ; had known cattle to live in the Old Country on oatmeal and other things. J. Barrow, furraor, Kiwitea, deposed: The sire of the bull in question was a pure bred Hereford ; sold a similar one for £3; the value of plaintiffs bull was £3 in the market ; bought a bull j for £2 siuce. Cross-examined : The sire is a first class bull, the property of Mr Davis ; heard plaintiff say he gave £5 for the j bull when 3 days old. William Mitchell, fanner, Kiwitea, deposed : had been a farmer for four years ; knew the bull in question ; ■aw it before and after it was hurt ; it was worth about £4 — he judged by the way bulls were selling privately. By the Bench: Thought plaintiffs bull was rather better than that of Mr Barrow. Mr Esam addressed the Bench for the defeuee. He considered the damages laid were excessive. Mr Sandilands addressed the Court in reply. .The B.M said he was of opinion that ihe damage was caused by the bull of the defendant, and the verdict would be £6 and costs. C. Haggett r Turner.— Claim £20. Mr Haggett asked that the case be adjourned. Bequest granted, plaintiff te pay expenses. Whifc v Noffke — Claim £15 12s 4d. Case adjourned to noxt sittings. Mr Bsam made an application uudei the 167 th section of the Licensing Act for a prohibition order affecting Mr W. 8. Staito. The order was granted to apply tc FeUdiugj Paimeraton, Bulls, Sandoa, (Ajrahuri, Halcombe, and Cheltenham. l"' The Court then adjourned.