DISTRICT COURT.

Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 168, 27 April 1871, Page 5

DISTRICT COURT.

(Before 'Iw Hmioui 1 Mr. Justice Grey.) Friday, April 21. In the case of Murray v. Smith, Mr. Mouat, in the absence of Mr. Gooday, moved for an arrest of judgment, or for a new trial under lules 102 and 197. He contended that the plaintiff, in order to maintain tho action, was obliged to allege and prove a trespass by defendant's sheep. N"o allegation of trespass appeared in tho plaintiffs statement, and no trespass had been proved. The evidence disclosed that the plaintiff, after having collected his sheep from land owned jointly by himself and defendant, found two of defendant's sheep in his yards. There was nothing whatever to show that the sheep were not driven off defendant's own land by plaintiff's servants. Attention was also called to the mode tf depasturing cattle on Hundreds, which mi<»hl possibly be construed as a mutual waiver of trespassers by hundredors.

His Honour said that although the evidence of trespass was perhaps not so clearly proved as might have been desirable, yet defendant's counsel had an opportunity of cross-examining plaintift's witnesses, and not a single question had been asked on the the point in crossexamination. The plaintiff's statement might bs defective, but suitors were not enforced to strict adherence to written pleadings, and he thought the statement was sufficient under the circumstances. The expenses of a new trial would probably amount to £60, or half the amount of damages in dispute. Rule refused without costs.