Fending S.M. Court

Feilding Star, Volume XV, Issue 281, 6 April 1894, Page 2

Fending S.M. Court

Thursday, April sth, 1894. (Before Mr Brabant, 8.M.) The following cases were heard after we went to press yesterday: -^ O. E. Lipsham v. Fritz Gagera; claim, £3 18s 9d. Mr Beade for plaintiff, and Mr Richmond for defendant. Judgment for plaintiff for 16s 6d (plaintiff being nonsuited on the other items in claim)' with costs 13s. Keen v. Keen. This was a case in which the wife 1 petitioned for a prohibition order against her husband. Mr Prior for complainant, and Mr Richmond (acting for Mr Bandilands) for defendant. Mrs Keen, Joseph Keen, Edward Keen, and Constable Tuohy, gave evidence in support of the application, and M. Keen, the defendant, gave evidence opposing it. Anprd^r was made prohibiting the sale of liquor to defendant, to all hotels between the Manawatu and Rangitikei rivers, for twelve months. J. Whittle v. C. A. Weightinan j claim, £44 14s: Mr Prior for plaintiff, and Mr Richmond for defendant. The sum of £21 14s was admitted and paid into Court. ■■■■*. ; -- r ,, John Whittle, deposed : He was a settler residing at Awahuri ; made arrangements with detendant to crop 21^ acres of land ; the arrangements were that defendant was to give for • over fifty bushels to the acre one third, under fifty one quarter of the grain, and half the straw ; the corn was to be thrashed on the ground ; warned defendant not to remove the crop off the land ; the reason defendant gave for wanting to remove the crop was the want of water j tried to prevent defendant from removing the crop, which was removed by force; defendant did not let witness know when the grain was threshed ; the first intimation witness had was when he saw the steam up; then instructed Mr Knight to keep tally of the amount of grain threshed ; it was a good avenge crop, and would estimate it at about three tons to the acre;* straw 'was worth about 10s a ton ; let igrouud before on similar terms; unless an agreement to the contrary is made, it is customary that the straw belongs to the land owner ; £5 would not compensate for the removal of the straw. Cross-examined : \ The agreement was to have^been^4nfrr-writißg,.J)ut it was not signed ; the arrangement was made in witness' house ; when the crop was taken away defendant promised to return witness' share of the grain and straw; would be surprised to learn there was only twelve tons in the stack ; it was unreasonable to think that the crops could be removed off the land on which it was grown under the conditions of this case ; told defendant that sooner than have trouble he would pay him for what fa.c had done; made use of no threats; told defendant he would have to send the oats to witness 1 piace ; would not go for the grain to defendant's place ; did not agree with defendant to take a quarter of the grain. ' Re-examined ; Asked bis man " Jack " to go with him as a witness when he went to stop Weightinan from removing the crop; defendant offered to take to witness* place a load of straw. Miss J. J. Crabb deposed : Resided with Mr Whittle; remembered the agreement between Mr Whittle and Mr Weightman ; [This witness corroborated the evidence of the previous witness] and was cross-examined at length by Mr Richmond. John Whisker deposed: Had been a farmer all his life; witness and km brothers have taken land on terms; the crops were stacked jon the grooncT where grown; witness nsedtotajce* portion of the straw, part onljf of which was theirs; crops are invaimbiy threshed on the land where gtis9fn ; considered the same proportfqii' of straw as of grain was due to th«fperson who cropped; the owner of the land had a right to the straw. Cross-examined : Would not remove crops if the area of land was large ; always threshed on the land w^re the crops were grown. ■;; ? Samuel Knight deposed ; .Went to Mr Weightman's to keep'tallyyon behalf of Mr Whittle, of the number of bushels put through the machine ; was not instructed to act as general agent for plaintiff and had not taken charge of the latter's share ; should say it was a good crop ; it would be well within the mark to say there would be two tons of straw to the acre ; a fair crop of meadow hay would go 30 cwt to the acre and clover two ton.s By the Bench : It was between half a mile and three quarters from the paddock where the crop was grown to where it was thrashed ; thought the cartage of the straw could be done for three shillings a ton ; the only reason witness could assign for the removal of the straw would be tor defendants own convenience ; th<t cartage of water could make no difference. Archibald Smart deposed : Saw the crop in question, which was a medium _ one ; witness has taken land for crop} ping on terms, that is, giving fourths, threshed the crops on the ground were it was grown ; considered the straw belonged to the owner of the land. W.F.Phillips deposed; Knew the crop of oats in question ; had token land on terms this last season ; there was never any mention made as to the straw ; removed the grain before it was threshed in one case and the other he did not; at the lowest it would cost 7s 6d a ton to cart straw from defendant's to plaintSPs j out of four acres on one occasion got a little over eleven tons of oaten chaff. Cross-examined : In the case of I giving one-fifth of the grain would have had to ask permission before he could remove the straw ; paid c&fth for the rental of the land from which "iifi^ removed the straw ; never before \ cropped on shares. This was the case for the plaintiff. Case adjourned to next sitting of the court.