MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Hokitika Guardian, 20 July 1928, Page 3

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

FRIDAY-; JULY 20th

(Before W. Mcldrum, Esq., S.M.)

ILLEGALLY IMPOUNDING CHARGE.

William Jeffries (Mr Murdoch) charged George Steele (Mr Bates) with on 22nd March, 1928, illegally impounding 174 sheep at Koiterangi, the property of W. Jeffries, contrary to the Impounding Act. A plea of not guilty was entered by defendant. Mr Murdoch itt opening said the sole question for decision was whether Mr Jeffries was the owner of certain sheep, that the sheep were put oil certain land by the permission of the owner and whether Mr Steele illegally impounded them. Evidence was led as follows: James A. Chesney, Receiver of Land Revenue and Chief Clerk, Lands Department gave evidence that the river frontage Miso. Lie. 1541 at Koiterangi, of 200 acres, was held on March 22nd, 1928, by D. J. S. Diedrichs, the registered licensee. On 16th May, 1928, the license was terminated and a new license was issued to G. Steele and W. Jeffries. Before any change of title could be made the consent of the Land Board was necessary. The rent was paid by Diedrichs. To Mr Bates—The new grant gives 19-20 to Steele and 1-20 to Jeffries, as tenants in common from 16th May, 1928. It was not disclosed to witness that Diodrich had disposed of his adjoining property. The application for a transfer of the property was referred to at n recent Land Board meeting hut tliis application had not been before the Land Board. This application was dated 27th July. 1927.

William Jeffries gave evidence that he was an auctioneer at Hokitika. The document handed in was not received by witness until 28tli March. It notified that a number of 174 sheep had been impounded on 22nd March, 1928, on the land known as Maori Reserve and signed by G. Steele. This notice was left at the office of witness and was the only notice of impounding received. There were 180 sheep affected. There wero various earmarks. They were all wethers. The earmarks as handed in were quite apparent. Roughly 100 had the first earmark and the balance the second earmarx. The ears of two wethers' were produced. Witness was the owner of these 180 sheep. The sheep were being depastured on Butler’s property on the south side of the Hokitika, river by Graham Bros. On 9th. Mar. Graham’s wife wired mt Butlers had wired that a fire was raging and see to sheep. Mrs Graham sent that message by telegram to Diedrich. In consequence witness arranged with. Diodrich and his (witness) man to remove the sheep. This was done, some being lost, and they were brought across tlio river. Discussed a location and Diodrich said why not put them on the Maori river bed. Saw Mr Chesney and asked who was the owner of the river lied and Chesney replied D. J. S. Diodrich. The sheep were removed and put on the riverbed, Lease No. 1541, oil Sunday, March 11th, about 3 p.tu. Witness personally assisted to put them on the river bed and counted them. Diodrich, F. Saxon and McMullnn also were present. Witness nexb proceeded to Mehrtens’ house. At this time did not know of the existence of Steele in the property adjoining the river bed. Advised Mehrtens that lie (witness) had put the sheep on the river bed run. Mehrtens said Steele was there, but witness said as Mehrtens was manager it was sufficient. The land adjoining the riverbed was not all legally fenced. Heard nothing till March 23rd, when at Westport, when lie was advised from Hokitika by telephone that the sheep had been impounded. V hen witness returned to Hokitika on 28th March he interviewed Mr Sellers who said the sheep had been impounded by Steele's agent and lie (Sellers) bad released (hem, and had paid a [sum of money Li j |,| s (o get posession, Melirtens signing the receipt on behalf ol Steele. Witness had been put to great inconvenience and lm claimed the impounding was illegal. To Mr Bates—Notice.of the impounding was left at his office, but lie did not see it until the fees bad been paid. He bought tlio sheep Ironi a dealer named O’Regan at lunngahua Junction. He declined to state the price. They wero all wethers. Ho put the sheep on the river bed to save them from starvation, because lie had the permission of -Mr Diedrichs and also because.he had a share in the 1 toehold' adjoining. To Mr Murdoch —It was a matter of urgency owing to the fire at Butler s to remove the sheep and he had Diedrjcli.s’ permission to put them on the river .bed section. It was admitted that between the river bed and the Maori block the fences were not perfect. Mr Murdoch held the notice was illegal under the decision of Four judges, and he quoted at length. Mr Bates replied shortly and asked to he allowed to call evidence. George Steele deposed he was a farmer, resident in Canterbury. He uas lessee of a property at Koiterangi of a section and river bed lease. He leased from Mr Robinson. He had paid his rent up to August Ist. Witness was present when Mr Jeffries gave notice to Mehrtens. He went to Christchurch and obtained legal advice. Later he examined tho slice]). They were not all wethers, including two .stags and some ewes. '

Henry Mehrtens deposed he was a farmer at Koiternngi, adjoining the Maori block, and did work for Mr Steele. He impounded certain sheep on the Maori block. There were no sheep on the riverbed then. llieic were wethers, ewes and two rams, i nere were three or four different earmarks. There was no drafting yard available.

To Mr Murdoch—Did not take that mueli notice of the eamarks to say wliat they were like. They were impounded in one place and taken to another part of the area. George Steele, recalled, said he did not know exactly where Jeffries’ section was, hut had a good idea. The sheep earmarks varied a great deal. Mr Murdoch quoted further eases in support of his previous contentions. Mr Bates held lliat the description on the notice was sufficient under the c i roumstances.

HIS WORSHIP’S DECISION. His Worship in giving his decision stated an occupier of land on whose land another owner is trespassing is given certain directions. If impounding on his own property or driving to a pound certain notices have to he given. la each case the notice must soecifv certain 'particulars set out in the Act. It was claimed by Mr Murdoch that the notice given by the defendant ('ll did not specify the nlnce where the trespass occurred and (2) did not give the'earmarks of the sheep. It was proved by Jeffries that, the sheep all had definite earmarks The Act says the jut pounder shall specify places and earmarks and m the notice no earmark was given and no place was stated. The cases quoted by Mr Murdoch .were conclusive and showed the impounding was illeeu 1 because the place of impounding' was not stated in tlic notice. He therefore found the impounding was illegal. Defendant would he convicted and fined £lO and Court costs 10s, witnesses £3 Us, counsel’s fee £3 3s.