RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT TEMUKA.

Temuka Leader, Issue 905, 17 January 1882, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT TEMUKA.

Monday, January 16, 1882. (Before S. D. Barker (Chairman), and J. Mendelaon Esqrs , J.P’s.) A STOLEN DOG. Williamßryant was charged.with having a stolen, greyhound dog the property of Dr Macintyre of Tirmiru, in his possession. Mr E; S. Pearson appeared on behalf of the accused; Thomas Bullock : I am. a servant in the employment of Dr Macintyre, I have been in his employment for nbout six years. Dr Macintyre had a greyhound nup last year which was stolen about 27th July last. The dog was let out of the kennel and it ran down the street. I followed, but failed to find him The last place he was seen was opposite the old Bank Hotel, Titnnrn. I continued to search for the dog, but oonld find no trace of him. Dr Macintyre advertised for the dog. I next saw the dog in the shop of the accused on Saturday last. I spoke to kirn about the dog and he said it was his

property. I said I was sent out by Dr Maointyre to see the dog and recognised it as the doctor’s property. I asked him if he would give.it up and he said “ It is my property and I dare you to touch it. If you do, it is you or I for it. I asked him how lon g since he got the dog, buthe made no reply and refused to' give it up. I then went to the police station and informed the police. lam positive the dog produced is the same as that stolen from Dr Macintyre in July last. I told the accused that the dog in his possession was the one stolen from Dr Macintyre. but he gave no satisfaction.

To Mr Pearson ; The clog was tied up in the blacksmith’s shop. The accused was perfectly sober. He did not tell me he bought the dog. I told him my name and he told me his.

John Morton : 1 am a constable in charge of the Temuka Station. On Saturday last Thomas Bullock, the last witness came to the station and reported that a certain greyhound dog had been stolen from Dr Macintyre, of Timaru and was now in possession of the accused. Inconsequence I went to the accused s blacksmith shop and Bullock pointed out the dog. I asked accused how he came by the dog and he said “ I suppose I bought it.” I asked I‘m from whom and he would not tell me, he would give no account of bow he came by the dog and defied any one to meddle with it as it was his property As 1 could get no satisfaction fiom the accused I arrested him for having the stolen dog in h's possession, and also took possession of the dog. To Mr Pearson : The accused was not quite sober but was quite capable of shoeing a horse. Peter Macintyre : I am a duly qualified medical practitioner, residing at Timaru, I believe the dog now in Court is mine, I cannot swear that it is, but from the the peculiar marks on his body I believe the dog to be mine. I bred the dog. It was about seven months old when I lost it. It has grown considerably since, but still he has all the peculiar marks that it had; when, a pup. I placed the matter in the hands of the detective in Timaru and advertised; three times-, in the Timaru Herald. I made every inquiry but could find no trace of it. The dog is worth about £ls. I never gave accused or anyone else authority to have possession of the dog. I have no doubt on my mind that the dog now in Court is the one stolen.

To Mr Pearson : I identify the dog as mine from its color and its peculiar form. To the Court : I have not authorised anyone to, sell the dog on my behalf.

Tliis having concluded the evidence fertile prosecution, the defendant called, John Woodhead : I am a farmer residing in this district. I recognise the dog as one bought by me about 5 weeks ago from John Breakwell of Milford for £l. I sold the dog to the accused for £1 10s about a fortnight ago. Mr Pearson then addressed the Bench, after which Mi Barker said the case would be dismissed. The accused had himself to blame for the annoyance he had been subjected to. CIVIL CASES. B inskin and Gimpson v. K. Cameron— Claim £l2 6s Bd. Judgment by default for the amount claimed with costs.