Feiding S.M. Court.

Feilding Star, Volume XVIII, Issue 70, 19 September 1896, Page 2

Feiding S.M. Court.

O — FBI DAY, SEPTEMBER 18th, 1896. (Beforo R. L. Standford, S.M.) The following cases were dealt with after we went to press yesterday : — C. Bath v. Wm. Phynn ; claim £3 10s. Mr Sandilands for defendant, plaintiff j conducting his own case. This was a I claim for the recovery of half the cost of erecting seven chains of a boundary fence. The defence was that the fence . erected was not a sufficient fence under the meaning of the Act of 1895. The defendant was willing to pay a fair price for the fence if it was made to comply with the Act, and stated that 14s a chain would be a good price. The plaintiff gave evidence of the description of the fence and to having served a notice on defendant according according to the Act of 1892 ; that after lie served the notice, defendant took i exception to the way the fence was erected and that he (plaintiff) then put another wire under the original bottom wire, making eight wires altogether. Wm. Phynn and Jas. Fitton were examined as to the description of the fence and to the cost of erecting a similar fence ; they alleged that the fence was not yet sheep proof. His Worship held that to enable the recovery of the half cost of erecting a boundary fence it was absolutely necessary that the fence must be put up strictly in accordance with the Act, and that if a fence is not erected in such manner and objection taken by the adjoining owner after notice has been 3orved on him, the mistake cannot be remedied by the person desirous of recovering. He, therefore, gave judgment for the defendant with costs 17s, witness' expenses 20s 9d, and solicitor's fee 21s, at the same time recommending the defendant to pay and plaintiff to accept payment at the rate of 15s a chain as a fair price. Defendant offered to pay 14s a chain and half the cost of making the fence sheep proof. C. P. Jensen v. Henrietta Arnott ; claim £24. Mr Sandilands instructed by Mr Sandeman, for plaintiff and Mr Cathro for defendant. This was a claim for the recovery of damages alleged to have been incurred by a dog, the property of defendant, worrying plaintiff's sheep, the claim being made up as follows, viz,, £10 16s for toe loss of 18 sheep killed, £'6 4s as damages at 8s per head for 8 sheep alleged to have been badly worried, and £10 for general damages to plaintiff's flock. C. P. Jensen, who was a settler residing at Apiti, gave evidence of the sheep owned by him having been worried by a dog, which was seen in the act and driven away by Peter Hansen ; on going over his section and after mustering he found that eighteen sheep bad been killed and eight badly worried ; he valued his sheep which were mostly 2-tooth wethers, some ewes and about one hundred hoggets at 12s per bead ; those which had been badly bitten had depreciated in valae to the extent of 8s per head : tbe boys Arnott had been in the vicinity of his property with two dogs on the day the sheep were worried, viz., July 12. In cross-examination he stated it was nine days after the worrying that he mustered, but that on the same day he bad informed members of Arnott's family that the sheep had been worried by their dog. Peter Hansen deposed to seeing a dog worrying tbe sheep and to being certain it belonged to defendant ; in other respects his evidence corroborated that given by the previous witness. P. McConnell deposed to being asked to examine the plaintiff's sheep after mustering and described the sheep as being of a good class ; he, also, described the injuries to some of them. W. S. Barber, registrar of dogs for the Pohangina, gave evidence of the description of defendant's dogs. Mr Hargreaves also gave evidence, but of an unimportant nature. The defence admitted the boys Arnott had been in the vicinity of plaintiff's property on the morning of the day in question with their dogs bat denied their ever having been out of sight for any time. Leslie Arnott gave evidence of he and a brother havinp gone to bring the cows home, taking two dogs with them ; he denied that either of the dogs had been out of his sight for even a few minutes, although they were taking cattle out of tbe bush adjoining plaintiff's property, where they (the boys) were for about an hour for the purpose stated. Mrs Caroline Hughes deposed to plain. tiff going to her father's place on the afternoon of Jnly 12th and stating that defendant's dogs had worried his sheep, which witness denied at the time. His Worship was of opinion that the dogs when in the vicinity of plaintiff's property had ample opportunity to worry the sheep, and it was clear one of the dogs had done so. He would allow 12s per head for 18 sheep, 8s for the sheep badly worried, and £5 as damages to the flock. Therefore, judgment was given for £19, with costs 28s, solicitor's fee 31s, and witnesses' expenses £6 11s. Andrew Laing v. C. Simpson ; claim £12 10s. Mr Sandilands, instructed by Mr Sandeman, for plaintiff and Mr Richmond for defendant. This was a case arising from the purchase of three stacks of oaten straw by the plaintiff from defendant in Jane last. The stacks were estimated to produce 35 tons of chaff, which plaintiff bought in the stack at £2 10s a ton, paying £85 at time of purchase. After the straw was cut into chaff the plaintiff alleged there were under 30 tons of chaff in the three stacks. He now sought to recover the difference, alleging that he bad purchased at per ton and not the three stacks as they stood, chancing the quantity they contained. Provision also being made in the agreement that plaintiff could have one stack threshed if be chose. The defence was that three stacks had been purchased, regardless of quantity, on plaintiff's own estimate and that there was no agreement that plaintiff could thresh one stack, the bargain being concluded when tbe money was paid. A. Laing deposed to purchasing the oaten sbeaf straw at £2 10s a ton for 35 tons, defendant agreeing to guarantee that quantity ; the agreement was that witness was to take delivery on tbe ground ; he only took the three stacks because defendant agreed to allow him to get one stack threshed if he chose ; employed G. Boness to cut the straw into chaff, and first arranged that one stack should be threshed ; two stacks and a portion of the third were cut into oaten chaff, giving 27 tons 5 bags ; 45 bushels of oats weighing 18cwt were threshed, and the straw cut into 1 tou 3 bags of chaff ; about one ton oi straw was wasted. In cross-examination he said that had there been 4Q tons he would have expected to pay tfce difference. George Boness corroborated the evidence of previous witness as to amount of chaff cut, but stated there was about two tons of straw wasted ; he estimated that about a third of one stack was threshed, the balance of the stack returning 8 tons of chaff, therefore, had the lot been cut up, they would have had another 4 tons of chaff, less the 1 ton 8 bags of straw chaff. At this stage the Court adjourned until next sitting.