RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1009, 26 September 1882, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Tkmuka—Mon oat, Sept. 25, 1882

[Before J. Beswick, Esq, 11. M.] DRUNK AND DISORDERLY. W. Taylor charged with the above offence was fined 5, or the usual alternative. CATTLE TRESPASS. E. Forward and Boyd Thomson, and Wilis, a native, ware fined 40s each for allowing two horses belonging to them to wander on the railway. RESCUE OV CATTLE. Cope, a native, was charged with having rescued sheep which F. Oldfield had taken for the purpose of impounding. Fred. Oldfield : I am the complainant. On Monday the 11th inst. I found sheep trespassing' on mv lamL.

and was taking them f o the pound when accused met me on the road and said he would warm me, and turned the sheep back. I told him to get out of the road,:»s I was taking them to the pound, but he would not, and turned the sheep back. I had taken them about three quarters of a mile. I believe the sheep belonged to,Mr Quinn. To Mr Johnston : I took them off the land near, the river. There are about 280 acres of land fenced in there. There is a road running between my land and Ackroyd’s land. The plaintiff then pointed out on the map the spot from which the sheep were taken. It appeared that there is a piece ot land outside the fence on his property which ho claims as his, and that it was irom this the sheep’ wora taken by him. Examination continued : The, sheep were three weeks on the place. I told Mr Quinn to take them away, and he said he would. Mr Ackroyd did n.t keep his sheep on the same place. I took the sheep three quarters of a mile before I met Cope. When I told him L was taking them to the pound he said *‘ not now, you ; you may summon me if you like.”

Henry Griffin gave evidence to the effect that he saw the sheep on the place indicated, and saw the plaintiff taking them away. He saw the defendant coming up, and offer to fight both himself and the boss (Oldfield.) Cope : I have been herding sheep and cattle fur Mr Ackroyd for about two years, and have habitually kept sheep and cattle on the place Mr Oldfield impounded the sheep from. He never gave me notice to remove them, never asked me who owned them, and never told me to take them away. The sheep in question were three weeks on the land. I never heard that Oldfield claimed the laud outside his feaco. Smith (of Milford), Wood, the Maoris* and Ackroyd were in the habit of keeping cattle there. Oldfield took the sheep off the girl, and I followed him, and overtook him about a mile from the place. I took the sheep off him. I had a dog tied there and it was let loose. To Mr Hamers ley ; The dog was tied in the river bed to keep the sheep from going on to the terrace. William Walker, a native, said: The sheep were running on the river bed ; there was no sheep on the terrace at the time. The sheep were grazing on the shingle pretty close together. They were as far as from here to the Temuka bridge away from the terrace. To Mr Hamersley : I belong to the Maori religion. The book I have been sworn on is supposed to be a Bible. Mr Hamersley ; Have you ever read it? Witness: Not in English. The Court : What religion are you ? Witness ; Well, I don’t— The Court : Are you a Roman Catholic ? Witness : Oh no, oh no ! I am mot. I do not know whether it was in the beginning of the week or in the end. Mrs Roberts, a lady of the Maori persuasion, came up shyly, and when placed in the witness box joined in the laughter provoked by her own peculiar deportment. She stated that Oldfield took the sheep off the river bed. The sheep were about half a mile away from Oldfield’s’ fence down the river. She was on the river bed catching fish. To Mr Hamersley : I am not the wife of the last witness. I was in the river bed at the time. W. Ackroyd : Cope has acted for me as herder at Milford. My right to run cattle and sheep on the place oft’ which the sheep were impounded has never been disputed. There is about ha’f a mile of liver b!5. This concluded the case and the Court was proceeding to say that evidently a rescue had taken place when Mr Johnston asked to be allowed to point out a clause in the ordinance. His Worship said he believed he knew what Mr Johnston referred to. Mr Johnston : If you give me the Ordinance I will point out the clause, your Worship. His Worship: Tell me the clause, Mr Johnston. Mr Johnston : I can’t, unless ynU give me the Ordinance, your Woiship, His Worship : It is of no use. It is not make one bit of difference as regards my decision. Mr Johnston : How can you say that until you hear what I have to say. Surely your Worship will allow me the Ordinance. : The Ordinance was then handed to Mr Johnston, and after reading a clause in it said his Worship had no power to inflict a penalty. His Worship said he felt fully satisfied on that point. The lowest pcaalbf

he could inflict was £5, and, taking the circumstances into consideration, he thought that too much. What he intended to do was to dismiss the case, and order the defendant to pay all costs. Mr Hamersley pointed out that he could not do that. His Worship said he would take upon himself to do it. Mr Hamersley said he could not do it except by consent. His Worship then asked whether Mr Johnston would consent to the decision. Mr Johnson proceeded to consult his client, and .as he took some time to do so, His Worship said he would inflict .the penalty of £5. Mr Johnston said L.e was consulting his client. His Worship said the Court could not wait all da/ for him. Ultimately Mr Johnson agreed to pay costs, and so it was decided, the amount.of .the costs being £2 4s. G. Davis v. T. Palmer —Claim £l2 damages sustained through the loss ol a cow bogged on the farm of defendant. Mr Johnston appeared for the plaintiff and Mr Jameson for defendant. Henry Davis, aged 18 years and a son of the plaintiff, recollected seeing the defendant take nine cows belonging to his father away from him. The strawberry cow, Daisy, was amongst them. He told Palmer the cows belonged to h : s father, but he replied that he would kick him. He did not see Daisy afterwards until she was found dead in a bog hole. To Mr Jameson : The bog hole is near Mr Palmer’s bouse on Mr Palmer’s land. I saw the cows in the pound the s. me evening, but Daisy was not amongst them. Thos. Davis, another son of the plaintiff, stated that he saw Mr Palmer afterwards, and he pointed out the cow to him in the bog hole. ; Mr Palmer told witness to tell bis father to remove the cow at once. Henry Davi>, the lad of 13 years, was recalled, but broke down completely in his evidence, he being unable to give any idea as to when he saw the cow last. His Worship said that be could place no reliance on his evidence. G. Davis, the plaintiff, stated that Palmer came to him in Vine street, and told him that one of his (Davis’) cows was bogged on his farm. Witness told him he would make him (Palmer) responsible, and Palmer said ‘Well, I’ll have to stand it, I suppose.’ John Lawson produced the pound book, and said the cow in question had not been impounded. The case was nonsuited. Job Brown v. Berry—Claim £7. Judgment summons. His Worship asked the plaintiff whether he had forwarded the defendant his expenses to come to Court, and the reply being to the effect that he had not the case was adjourned. The Court then rose.