SHOOTING A NEIGHBOUR'S DOGS.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XVI, Issue 5201, 7 December 1895, Page 3

SHOOTING A NEIGHBOUR'S DOGS.

' J, L. MURRAY v.F, W.PARKER, At the Masterton S.M. Court yesterday afternoon, before Mr T. 1 Hutchison S.M., Francis William Parker was charged on the information of J. L. Murray, with wilfully destroying a spaniel dog, on Sunday November 24th, tho property of informant, by shooting it, Mr Pownall appeared for the informant and Mr R, K. Jackson for the accused. J. L. Murray, sworn, said he resided in Church-street. On Sunday, November 24th he heard the report of a gun. He went out and saw the accused going away. Witness heard a dog yelping and saw that his own dog was shot-, Tho hind-quarters ; were all bleeding. The dog was a spaniel about live months old, Ho ' valued the dog at 13. Gave 30s for it when it was four or five weeks old. Usually kept the dog on a chain. The dog had not been oil tho chain but about half an hour, Witness' i child let the dog out, Witness ac- ( cused Parker of shooting the dog and Parker said tho dog was chasing his fowls. Asked Parker to show him the fowls. Parker showed him . some feathers in Mr J. Ranby's paddock. Witness told accused he had no right to shoot the dog on other , people's premises, Accused said lie would shoot the dog anywhere, even on witness' own premises. Accused , repeated these words before Mr i Keegan. Accused had never com- ; plained of the dog previously. The , following morning be examined the ( dog and anticipated the inevitable, consequently destroying the dog. ,| To Mr Jackson: Would be snr-

prised to hear tkt the (log had , killed more of Parker's fowls, Obtained the dog from Mr Bone. It was not a fully grown dog. AV. R. Bone gave eyidenco that i Mr Murray bought a spaniel . dog from him on July 25th. . Ho never knew the dog to worry • fowls. The dog was a pure-bred spaniel, and was worth about £3, h Neither his dog nor Murray's had worried Parker's fowls. . In auswertoarcmarkfromaccused j witness said he would not bo called . aliiir. His Worship said if accused would persist in interrupting the proceed-

i ings, ho would be put into tho dock. 1 Ho was only allowed to sit at tho table by courtesy. Witness continuing, said he gave j Parker leave to shoot his dog if he t found it worrying his fowls. Accused might havo been tinder the > impression that the dog was his, . J. Ranby, sworn, said he owned property in Elizabeth-street, adjoin--1 ing Mr Parker's. Never cave t Parker leave to run fowls or anything ! else on his property, neither had 3 he given Parker leave to shoot dogs i on the property. John Keegan said ho heard tho j report of a gun about mid-day on 0 Sunday, November 21th. Wont to t tho door, saw Parker walking toe wards his gate and the dog bleeding very badly. Parker told witness t that he shot tho dog on tho empty j section, Tho reason was that tho dog was worrying his (Parker's) 3 fowls. Parker had a dog of his own, 3 Saw Parker's dog running away B shortly after the report of the gun was heard, B J, L, Murray re-called, said when t he beard tho report of tho gun, he t jumped on to his fence and saw act oused on tho road, Accused said is both the dog and fowls were on Banby's section wlioii ho fired tho r gun. 0 Francis William Parker, tho accused, said that the dog was shot in >r his own fowlyardonNovombei'24th, - The spot lie poiuted opt on thp e yacant'section was wliprq hp rescued h a fowl from t|p dog, Had seen the n dog on three different occasions on y tho sap day, On tho first occasion i. the dog was worrying his fowls on Banby's section. Noxt occasion the ie dog was in bis fowl yard. He drove it out tho second time,. Saw the

do/* the third tirno in his yard, The fourth time it was there ho got the gun and shot the animal, Mr Murray never asked him where tho dog was shot, The previous Thursday ho drove the dog out of his place. About eight months ago ho had 40 fowls, now he had only eight. The redaction was o\ying to tho ravages of Mr J. L. Murray's and Mr Bone's dogs. Both Mr and Mrs Bono told him to shoot their dogs if tlioy were caught touching his fowls. Was under the impression it was Bone's dog, To Mr Pownall: The clog would not follow Mr Murray. Heard Murray whistlo tho dog on tho previous Thursday, but it would not go. Could not swear that the dog lie shot, was the same which had been worrying his fowls on the previous Thursday. Had seen Murray's dog on his premises, four times within twenty minutes. His o\vn dog was on the chain at tho time Murray's dog wag shot. Hud used his own dog to drive fowls out of his garden, Lewis Henry Hounslow, sworn, said ho knew the dog which was shot by Parker. Should say it was about six months old. Knew the mother and litter to which Murray's dog belonged. Never knew the dog iu question to worry fowls. Thought tho dog worth about 10s. If it worried fowls it would be wcrth a charge of shot. Mr Bone olfci ed his dogs at 10s each. Considered Bone got 011 the soft side of somebody lo get 30s for tho dog. This concluded the evidence. His Worship said this was ucriminal information in which the chargo should be clearly brought home because it involved a large line or a term of imprisonment, The defendant hp.s admitted that ho destroyed the dog. But tho question was whether the defendant's action had not some legal justification orexeuse under the" Dog Registration Act." Ho could not attach any impoitance to the sworn testimony of defendant as to the exact locality of the dog when it was shot, owing to the excitement which prevailed at the tinio. As this was a case in which the defendant was liable to a long term of imprisonment he should be entitled to any doubt, and the Bench would therefore dismiss the information.