Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

(Before H. M'ttjlloch, Esq., B. M.) MONDAY, 11th JUKE. G. THOiTSO2f V. STEPHEN MESZIES. T. M. Maedonald, for plaintiff; J. Harvey for defendant. This was a case of disputed delivery of cattle, and which occupied the Court the -whole day. At a sale by auction, held at "Wallacetown, the plaintiff bought from defendant twelve cows and five calves, but only received delivery of ten of the cows. He now claimed damages on account of short delivery of the two cows purchased by him to the amount of £30. For the defence, it was stated that plainti£Fb;ul received all the cows purchased by him, and evidence was led in substance as follows : — G. Thomson deposed that on the 3rd of May he had bought from defendant twelve cows and five calves, at the price of £145 10s, the cattle to be delivered on payment of the purchase money, that he did pay the money agreed upon, and that he only received ten cows and. fire calves. At the time of the sale he branded each purchase made by him with tar. Finding himself two cows short, and afterwards that defendant had sold to Mr Grieve two cows left in the sale yard at the eondusion of the sale, he examined the same, and found tar inarms upon them, which he alleged to be the t same as those made by him at the sale. Mr ~W. Russell gave corroborative evidence as to the purchase of the cows in question, and the marks of tar upon the cows purchased irom the defendant by Grieve. Messrs A. Eussell, P. Blaikie, and Elphinstone gave similar evidence. K. Grieve deposed to having purchased the day following the sale the two cows claimed, by plaintiff. He noticed a mark like tar upon one of them, but could not swear it was tar. «J; Grieve, senr., recollected one of the cows purchased by his son being put up at the auction, and bis having bid <££ tor it.

Mr C. A. Eoss, auctionneer, and Mr Monknian, his clerk, also gave evidence for plaintiff. Mr Stephen Menzies, for the defence stated that Thomson had purchased eleven cows at the sale, and must, throngh his own negligence, have found himself short ; that he particularly counted the cattle driven from the yard by the plaintiff, Blaikie, and others, and that they agreed with the total amount of the several lots purchased by them, and that he was the more particular with plaintiff's lot, as he seemed unahle himself to count them ; that at the conclusion of the sale, after all purchasers had removed their purchases, two cows remained, which he very carefully examined, and found no tar marks upon either of them ; he did so knowing that all these which were sold wer thus marked. Mr. Thomson he particu-e larly noticed had marked every one of his purchases so. He Lad also seen Mr. Thomson examining the two cows left, and that he seemed satisfied they were not included in his purchases. He the next day sold the tv? o cows to Mx. E. < Q-rieye. Mr. I\ Pelling had heard plaintiff remark previous to driving off his lot that he had got his number, and that with a view to purchase the two cows left he had carefully examined them for ony tar marks, but could find none. He examined them the following day, and was quite sure no tar marks were on either of them. Mr. J. H. Menzie3 corroborated his brother and the last witness' evidence. "W. Paterson had examined the two cows after the sale with thh intention of purchasing them ; he saw no tar marks upon either, and gave an offer for them. He would not have offered had he discovered any marks of tar. The counsel having addressed the Court at length, judgment was reserved till Tuesday morning. The Court considered it clearly proved that defendant had bought twelve cows, and had only received ten ; that all cattle exposed for sale hae been bona fide sold, and none reserved ; and that the two left, the Court had no doubt, were the property of plaintiff. Judgment was therefore given for £20, the- value of the two cows with costs, amounting to £17. I EKE2TS TEES' T. MLLSTEAD. I Claim for goods. Postponed for a fortnight, for further evidence.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ST18660613.2.12

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Southland Times, Volume VI, Issue 493, 13 June 1866, Page 3

Word count
Tapeke kupu
724

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. Southland Times, Volume VI, Issue 493, 13 June 1866, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. Southland Times, Volume VI, Issue 493, 13 June 1866, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert