CLAIM FOR SHEEP

Wairarapa Times-Age, 17 March 1939, Page 5

CLAIM FOR SHEEP

LITIGATION IN STRATFORD MR POLSON AS CO-DEFENDANT. MAGISTRATE RESERVES DECISION. (By Telegraph—Press Association.) STRATFORD. March 16. A case in which Mrs L. A. Garlick, Te Wera, is suing William H. H. Young, farmer, Stratford, and William John Polson, M.P. for Stratford, for the return of sheep valued at £155 18s or that sum, entered its fourth day of hearing in Stratford today. The claim arose from Mrs Garlick’s allegation that between September and December, 1936, 66 ewes and lambs disappeared from the back of her propertyon to an adjoining one on which defendants had sheep grazing at intervals. Decision was reserved by Mr W. H. Woodward, S.M.

During the evidence Mrs Garlick said' that she had not brought the case on sooner because at the time she was in debt to the New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Company, which was also acting for defendants. She said she was told by Mr Freeman T. Hale, Stratford manager of the company, that she must not take legal action against defendants, and she also alleged that she could not get a Stratford solicitor to take her claim ‘to Court. She said that during an interview in Mr Hale's office Polson admitted defendants’ liability and promised restitution. The defence was that the sheep Mrs Garlick claimed from defendants’ flock as hers were ones bought from an Inglewood farmer. Evidence submitted was designed to show that her sheep could not have strayed on to defendants’ property. Polson said that he made no admission .of liability, but told Mrs Garlick if it were found that any injustice had been done he would see it put right. He came to the conclusion that her claim was unfounded. Young said he was convinced that Mrs Garlick’s claim was incorrect as he could prove that the sheep claimed by her were bought in Inglewood. Mrs Garlick alleged that Mr Hale’s and the Stratford solicitors’ attitude was due to political affiliations with Polson. Mr S. Macalister, for defendants, submitted that Mrs Garlick delayed action to embarrass Polson at election time, but Mr R. J. O’Dea, for Mrs Garlick, said that he deliberately withheld the issue till after the election.

Percy Thomson, mayor of Stratford and a solicitor, said at the last hearing that, though he acted as negotiator for Mrs Garlick early in the affair and refused to take the case to Court for her, his refusal was not because of political reasons.

The case was resumed today with final witnesses for the defence. Freeman Turner Hale, manager of the Loan and Mercantile Company, Stratford, said that his firm adopted a neutral attitude throughout. He said that the conference at his office had not been called by the firm. He confirmed Polson’s statement that he promised Mrs Garlick, if wrong had been done her, that it would be righted. Hale denied threatening to call up Mrs Garlick’s account, which was £146 in debt at the time. Polson received no profits from the working account. Any profits from or equity in the stock were Young’s. Much of the argument revolved round the use of similar earmarks by plaintiff and defendants. The defence was a complete denial of the conversion of the sheep. It was suggested also that the sheep might have died. Counsel’s submission was that plaintiff had not discharged the onus of proof and that she had not proved the identification of even one ewe at a time when identification was necessary and opportunities were of-' fered by Young and his manager to establish ownership.