R.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume VIII, Issue 2213, 6 February 1886, Page 2

R.M. COURT.

s MASTERTON-FRIDaY. . Before H, A, Stratford,Esq,, R.M. AtIEGED SHEEP STEALING. (Continued,) Charles Deakin continued his evidence, Last Tuesday he visited Fabian's farm at Papawai, Prank Thompson, Detective Chrysfcal, and George Harris with him, and they found sheep with his ear mark, being a square hole in each ear. No one else in the Wairarapa uses the mark. He also examined sheep at Messrs Beetham & Williams' run on the Taratahi.

Cross-examined by Mr Barton: Ho made Ingley proprietor of the earmark when he leased the farm. The sheep at Beetham and Wiliams and Fabians were examined for this mark. He charged him rent for the whole year 1884, because lie was to have the wool. The number of sheep in the schedule of lease was accused's own counting. Hugh Williams, manager for Beetham and Williams, deposed that he bought 550 through 'Mr Lyons, a commission agent. He went down to the accused's place to see them. Thomas A. Lyons deposed that, con jointly with Mr Dalrymple, he sold certain sheep to Mr Williams. In July he went to the accused and arrangod for the sale of 550 to Mr Williams,

Cross-examined by Mr Skipper.—He noticed the earmarks in some were a square hole and in others various other marks. The Chiff farm, in his opinion would only carry one sheep to four acres. He received £7O back out of the purchase money from accused for the purpose of buying merinos for him. Ho failed in being able to purchase G. S. W, Dalrymple confirmed lib connection in the transaction, as deposed by the last witness. 1

•• Several other witnesses having been examined, Mr Barton raised certain law points in reference to the lease, and those were argued. His Worship decided to give hisdecision at 9 o'clock last night. Mr Stratford gave judgment in the above case of James Ingley. The relative positions of informant and accused are bailor and'bailed, and their respective rights and liabilities ar.e to be found in a certain deed exhibit A. (the lease). The Magistrate's duty is ministerial not judicial, and he, under ordinary circumstances, is simply required to say whether there is sufficient evidence to put the accused on his trial for this offence, but in the case before the Court the Magistrate is called upon to the more responsible duty of deciding whether the facts disclose that • any offence has been committed by the accused. The clauses in exhibit A having reference to the sheep read thus:—"And will at all times during the continuance of the term hereby granted give the necessary time and attention required for the duo and proper management of the said sheep hereby bailed, and will at the expiration ov other determination of.the said term, deliver up to the said Charles Dakin, sheep of the like description and quality as those hereby bailed, andtothesamo number. And if any sheep die or are sold the said James Ingley shall replace thorn by others." Another clauso provides that "James Ingley may not part with any goods or chattels without the consent in writing of Dakin." Then there appears a proviso by way of security to Dakin in the event of breeches of agreement or defaults of Ingley, and Alex. Yulo is made a bondsman to fulfil the condition. After hearing the arguments of Mr Barton for the accused and law points raised, and the Crown prosecutor in reply, and reading as far as I have at my command cases applicable, I am of opinion the charge cannot be sustained, It is framed upon the third section of the Larceny Act, 18fi7, which applies to baliees. The word bailment, I am of opinion, must be interpreted according to its ordinary legal acceptance, In that sense, a bailment relative to something in the hands of the bailee which is to be returned in specie, and does not apply in the cate of chattels in the' hands of a party who is not under an obligation to return the specific chattels which lie originally received, but may substitute other chattels like in kind and number. The present case is therefore not within the statute, James Ingley may he morally guilty of a breach of trust, but Dakin has by the terms of the lease as far as regards the sheep, 4 all events protected Ingley from any criminal prosecution for any breaches of the covenants, and conditions contained in the lease. The accused is discharged. The verdict was received with cheeers,