Resident Magistrate's Court.

Marlborough Express, Volume III, Issue 102, 15 February 1868, Page 5

Resident Magistrate's Court.

BLENHEIM Monday, Feb. 10, 18G8. [Before S. L. Muller, Esq., R.M.] GREIG V. L. K. HORNE. An action to recover £l2, the value of certain sheep alleged to be detained by defendant. The plaintiff stated that he had lost some sheep, and defendant’s shepherd had informed him some time ago that there wore some among theirs, which bore his (plaintiff’s) ear-mark ; that having satisfied himself about this fact, he Imd applied for them to be restored, but defendant refused, alleging that he bought them at public auction, consequently he had brought the present action to recover their value. A. M'Laughlan deposed that about three j'ears ago he sold 100 sheep to plaintiff, which were branded with his registered ear-mark, and produed a piece of skin bearing such mark, which he believed to have come off the head of one of the sheep so sold. It is a front slit and a punch-hole in the off ear, and a fork in the near ear ; he bad not sold to anyone else except Nicholas Kelly. These latter were young, sound sheep, while Greig’s were old and broken-mouth-ed. He could not tell whether the mark produced was from an old or a young sheep. He had sold some fat sheep to the butchers—Parker and Leek—but not to any other. By Defendant : I sold to Greig in 1865, and think they would still be alive. They were thinmouthed, and perhaps 8 years old (all ewes) and the price Bs. I am not sure that I have not my full compliment of sheep at Stronvar, 40 miles distant, nor do I think sheep increase 2s. each in value from their eighth to twelfth year. Your shepherd said yours were broken-mouthed. James Henry Greig deposed that he was a farmer in Lower Wairau, and in June, 1865, bought 100 sheep from last witness, which he put among his own that they might mate together, after putting upon them a pitch brand G on the near ribs. He also face-branded a few with O which did not take well, and he did not remove the permanent brand. In August following he lost 35 to 40 of them, and upon going in search found one at Robinson’s, Spring Creek (which he left there), showing that more had gone that way. He did not find any more till shortly after a sale of O’Dwyer’s sheep at Lawrence’s on October 23rd, last year, when defendant’s shepherd told him that there were a number of sheep in the doctor’s paddock with the same ear-mark, the fence having got broken. He went over to look at them, and saw 14 or 15. Had still 100 left, but not all with this ear-mark. He had bought 45 more from M'Laughlin last year with the same eat-mark. All he had were pitch-branded. By defendant : I have killed all that were fat for my own use. Do not know how many have

died. Am sure those I lost did not come back, and am short as many as I sue for. Those I saw were marked P.D. The plaintiff produced a bill announcing the sale of O’Dwyer’s sheep by auction on October 23rd, when ho purchased 102 sheep at 9s. Id. each, all being pitch-branded P. D. Did not notice any ear-marks. Next day he went down and put the sheep in the yard, and such as were not ready for killing were face-branded. There was a great variety of brands among them as he remarked at the time. The lot were composed of drafts from Lucas’, Robinson’s, Raynor’s, and others, and marked P.D. His own face-mark was two bars across. He did not know the different ear-marks except Lucas’s. He understood they were all O’Dwyer’s sheep. Did not go into the yard, being called away. By plaintiff : The shepherd said there might be 20 or 30 ;do not how many. He gave me to suppose they were the same as Greig claimed, and marked O on the face. Part were a year old, and some were very old, not a tooth in their heads. I remember the best sheep wore Lucas’, marked with two punch holes. It was not stated at the sale whose sheep they were. Plaintiff said he did not observe the age of the sheep. Those lost were aged. He only noticed the brand. They were all full-mouthed. Am satisfied those I saw were part of them. Dr. Horne knows the ear-mark perfectly to be that of M ‘Laughlin’s. His shepherd would notice the mark more readily. Some sheep had three different brands. He only claimed for 25. The case was then adjourned till Monday for the production of further evidence.