WHO KILLED THE CAT?

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 3001, 20 February 1926, Page 3

WHO KILLED THE CAT?

NEIGHBOURS AT VARIANCE.

A case in which G. A. Hobbs made application that C. J. Neville be bound over to keep the peace occupied most of the time at the monthly sitting of the S.M. Court yesterday', before Mr. J. L. Stout, S.M

The case hinged round the killing of a kitten, the accusation of one party that the other had committed the act being the cause of all the trouble.

Mr. Bergin appeared for plaintiff and Mr. Clayton for defendant. George Alexander Hobbs, of Union Street, said that he and defendant had lived on friendly terms as neighbours for the- past seven years. On the evening of February 14th defendant called witness over to the boundary fence as he was going to milk and accused him of shooting his (defendant’s) cat, and defendent said that if he had a revolver there he would shoot him. Defendant also used abusive language to witness, and told him to wait till after dark and he would get him. Witness reported the matter to the police. On Tuesday Neville also accosted witness and asked him why he did not wait till after dark, and again used insulting language. Witness asked defendant if he was still going to carry out his threats and he replied in the affirmative. Witness again went to the police and was so afraid of Neville that he paid a boy to accompany him home after visiting the Police Station. Witness had been in ill health for three years. Was afraid of defendant carrying out his threat as he always made a boast that he did. Defendant had a revolver in his possession.

To Mr. Clayton: Neville had milked cows for witness on occasion. Witness had a shot gun and used it to shoot a stoat on the Friday night. Did not shoot defendant’s cat. Neville’s revolver was a German souvenir.

Constable Owen gave evidence that plaintiff had reported the quarrel to him, and as a result witness had spoken to defendant who appeared to take the warning in good part. The only weapon Neville had in his possesion was a German automatic pistol, a souvenir, for which he hud no ammunition.

Christine Hobbs, wife of plaintiff said that she saw Neville talking excitedly to her husband on the night of February 14th but could not'hear what was said. James Charles Neville in evidence stated that both he and his wife had been upset by the death of their kitten. Witness asked Hobbs if he had shot it and he immediately became abusive apd threatened to strike witness with a bucket he was carrying. He also told witness to keep his dog and fowls -off his (Hobbs’) property and said “this is not the last you’ll hear of this.” To Mr Bergin: Denied using the language alleged or threatening Hobbs. Did not speak to plaintiff on the Tuesday night. Phyllis W]allbutton, a child aged eleven years said that she had seen Neville pass Hobbs on the Monday night. Neither spoke, but Hobbs

turned round and followed Neville and subsequently went up town. The S.M. said that witness for defence saw the two parties concerned pass on Monday night, but not Tuesday. It was quite possible they met on the Tuesday night also. Neville had started the trouble and had evidently become excited over the kitten and used threatening language. If he had only used it on the 12th it would not have been of much account, but he had again used it on the 16th. Hobbs had been suffering from bad health and the Court would have to move and see that the peace was kept. In his opinion there was sufficient evidence to bind Neville over to keep the peace for 12 months. This was accordingly done the default being fixed at £lO,