THE COURTS. RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE.

Tuapeka Times, Volume II, Issue 100, 8 January 1870, Page 5

THE COURTS. RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE.

(Before W. L. Simpson, Esq , E.M.), and H. Eastings, Esq, J.P. Thursday, 6th January. M'Cluskey v. Rassmusson. — Claim of £10, value of a pig shot by defendant, and injury done by the same means to several others. Mr. Mouat (from M'Keay's office) for plaintiff ; Mr. Keen (from Mr. Ward's office) for defendant. The evidence for the plaintiff, given by three witnesses, was to the effect that upon several occasions the defendant had shot at and injured the plaintiffs pigs ; and that upon the 26th December he shct a sow, which was valued at £7, and injured her so severely that she died the following day. The plaintiff stated that he had upon several occasions told defendant that he (plaintiff) would be answerable for any injury his pi^js might do defendant's garden. Defendant told him that if he did not keep his pigs away, he would shoot them. For the defence, Mr. Keen called the defendant and two other witnesse-5, who had Seen the shooting. The pig 1 * were always in the garden when shot at, with one exception ; and the defendant swore that on that occasion the gun was loaded with powder only, and he fired once at the pigs to frighten them away Mr. Keen submitted that his client was justified in what he had done, and quoted the provisions of the "Pig and Poultry Ordinance, 1864," the conditions of which had been complied with. The Bench said that an important omission had been made by defendant ; he having failed to prove that his land was fenced Mr. Keen said that he had asked the question of one of the witnesses for plaintiff, and it had bsen replied to in the affirmative. Their Worships did not recollect it, and would therefore find for defendant with nominal damages of 55. ; and tho defendant could, if he thought proper, seek a rehearing. M'Coombe v. Johnson. — Claim of £1 15s, balance of purchase money for cow and calf. The defence set up was that the calf had never been delivered. Verdict for amount claimed with costs. Leslie v. Draper. — Claim of £18, value of a horse said to have been loaned by plaintiff to defendant, and ill-used by the latter to such an extent that the animal died. Mr. Keen for plaintiff ; defendant appeared in person. The particulars of the case, as stated by Mr. Keen, were briefly as follows : — The horse had been lent by plaintiff to defendant for two or three days to roll with. Instead of using it for that purpose, however, defendant rode it ; went stockriding on it, and was seen by several persons riding furiously. When returned, the horse was very ill, and in a few days died. A great deal of evidence was given, occupying the Court for two hours. Relative to the furious riding, the witnesses did not prove that any such thing had taken place, and their Worships decided that the evidence tendered by plaintiff was not sufficient to warrant them in calling for a defence. Case dismissed with costs. Sanderson v. Clarke. — Mr Keen stated that this case had been settled out of Court. [Mr. Bastings here left the Bench.] Lyng v. Farrer (as Treasurer to Tuapeka Hospital). — Claim of £3 15s 6d. The defendants paid 8s 6d into Court, and went to plead a breach of contract, as a bar to the recovery of the balance — a line of defence which his Worship said he could not receive. A specific action must be raised for that, or it should have been entered as a set-off at all events. Subject to a reduction of 3s 7d, error in account, judgment was given for the amount with costs. [Prior to the hearing of this case, his Worship required a written consent that he should sit on it, as he was a member of the Hospital Committee, and had in some way dealt with the matter in Com.nittee. If parties did not give this, the case must be sent to Tokomairiro. The required consent was immediately given by Mr. Mouat, who appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. Keen for defendant.]