INDIRECT DAMAGES

Tuapeka Times, Volume V, Issue 232, 11 July 1872, Page 8

INDIRECT DAMAGES

(To the Editor.) Sir, — As every matter bearing upon the celebrated Alabama claims musf prove deeply interesting to all your readers in general, and to the mem' bers of tho Geneva Convention in particular, I trust you will find spaca for a short report of a trial at the Teviot, where the decision on the main point at issue was pronounced. The case arose from the great Turkey question, which, I must explain, refers to the feathered biped and not to the country bearing that name. The plaintiff, Blair, a tenant farmer, sued the defendant, Grogan, for injuries alleged to be done by defendants turkeys to his seed wheat. The claim, disentangled from a chaotic mass of evidence, would stand somewhat thus : — To seed wheat on 5 acres, 2 bushels per acre- - £3 0 0 „ crop estimate on said ground, at 40 bushels, at ss. - - - - 50 0 0 „ value of 10 head of cattle fattened on straw - 100 0 0 „ labour and expense . - 40 0 0 „ anxiety and loss of sleep 100 19 4 £293 19 4 Grogan, in defence, refused to consider the indirect claims, and stated that, as he could not distinguish his turkeys from the other mobs, he could not understand how any other person could. That at the time of the alleged damage, the ground was frozen hard and covered with several inches of snow, so that unless each turkey possessed a set of boring rods, it could hardly disinter any seed. The Resident Magistrate, after a patient hearing, and careful consideration, disallowed the indirect claims, but awarded £2 damages and costs of cojirt ; rather .heavy considering he doubtful ownership and absence of valid proof of any material injury. Still the decision is a most important one, and armed with such a precedent the English Counsel may fearlessly combat their American opponents. lam &c HisTonrcus.