R.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume IX, Issue 3005, 17 September 1888, Page 2

R.M. COURT.

HASTERTON-MONDAY. ' Before S. Yon Stunner, R.M.) DRUNK, William Hillyard, charged with being drunk and disorderly in the public street on Saturday last, was fined 10/-, or in default, twenty-four hour's imprisonment. CIVIL OASES. John Hessey v. S. W. Donovan.— Malicious damage to property by cutting down a wire fence at Opalri. Claim £1 damages. Mr Bunny appeared for plaintiff, and Mr Pownall for defendant. This was a similar case to one already heard against defendant in the B.M. Court in December last, in which the defendant cut the fence as a protest against an infringement of aright which defendant considered he was legally entitled to. On that occasion a dismissal order was granted under section 70 of the " Justice of the Peace Act, 1872." On the suggestion of counsel for plaintiff the evidence takon on that occasion was read to save the time of the Court.

Mr Bunny said bis client was still prepared to allow defendant a right-of-way through bis property provided he erected a fence on each side of the road. It was with considerable dislike that-his client was compelled to take the present proceedings. John Hessey, plaintiff in the action then gave evidence as to defendant butting down two fences on his property. After the information in December had been-dismissed he re-erected the wire fence, which was again cut down. It was not so much the damage he was annoyed at but the expense he was put to in keeping men to look out to prove, his case. Some time after this Mr Pownall asked to settle the matter in a friendly w"ay to winch he. assented. Subsequently witness saw Mr Donovan and agreed to give tho land as a public road if he [would fence it on each side, but would expect him to pay previous Court expenses. Defendant and his solicitor was agreeable to fence the road to his satisfaction, but asked him to allow the matter' of fencing to remain until after the next meeting of the Masterton Eoad Board, as they thought there was a possibility of the Board doing it, and thus saving defendant tho expense. Thay promised if the Board failed to fence they would do it themselves. Since then he had repeatedly applied to have the matter settled. After keeping him in suspense all this time, he was distinctly told-a few days ago that defendant declined to fenoe, During the whole of the time the matter has been in dispute he has allowed defendant to go through his property! thinking he intended carrying ou his promise, Since receiving the re fusal he bad. the fence re-ercoted, bu no sooner was that finished than defendant cut it down again. The present action would have been brought before the Court earlier, but he had been repeatedly put off by various excuses by defendant's counsel. By Mr Pownall: Distinctly understood that the matter was to stand over until after theßoardmet as itwas thought they would pay for the fenoing and save Donovan that expense. The road in dispute was never recognised as a public one by witness. The reason he signed the petition to close the-road'was on account of boing informed that defendant was a consenting: party to its being closed. Last year lie had lost several sheep through his fence being left open. HewaswMugtogiye the land, but did not see why he should pay 'for the fencing as pll. If defendant had been a reasonable man, there wou}d have been np necessity for all this/trouble. The present action was taken but to try and prevent the defendant coming through his property. '• (Left Sitting,)