HYDE.-Nov. 20.

Mount Ida Chronicle, Volume III, Issue 196, 29 November 1872, Page 6

HYDE.-Nov. 20.

Hesidbnt Magistbate's Cottbt. (Before H. W. Kobinson, Esq., R.M.) Boyd v. Price.—Tin's was a claim for £25 damages, for unlawfully impounding sic working bullocks. Mr. IWlatt for pi dntiff. It was shown that the defenuant had impounded six bullocks, upon

which he had putJ34, expenses. The interest of the case turned upon whether the defendant Price had a sutßcient fenci to justify liim in impounding under the law novv in force. A great deal of evidence was taken upon this point, and also wit 1regard to the losses the plaintiff had been put to through six of his team being taken away to Macraes, and hard driven. If appeared that plaintiff had to buy one bullock to take the place of one temporarily disabled. The Court held that the fence was not sufficient. To" justify ciu impounding, it would be necessary thai the fence should be a fence within t'x meaning of the Fencing Ordinance, 1872. Mr. Price's fence was manifestly insufficient, being in parts only two and a half fret high. Verdict for £ls damages, with £"3 12s. costs of Court, £2 2s. professional co4s, and 30s. expenses of two witnesses. OJN r eill v. Sinclair.--Debt, £3 10s. No appearance of defendant. Judgment for amount claimed and costs.

Warden's Court. (Before IT. W. Robinson, Esq., Warden.) M'Auley and others v. O'Connell and others.—Complaint for breach of an agreement by which, as alleged, the defendants were to havo...supplied complainants with a good race in lieu of one washed away. Damages were laid at £B3 2s 6J for work and loss of time, and £45 damages sustained, by breaking away of said race. Mr Rowla't for plaintiff's, Mr Bailey for defendants. The hearing of this cas?. occupied the Court, until midnight, when, the complaint was dismissed, wi-h £3 10s expenses of'de'endants..

Grtnts. William An.net/ extended claim; J. Murray, dam.