R.M. COURT, HAMILTON.

Waikato Times, Volume XVIII, Issue 1486, 12 January 1882, Page 3

R.M. COURT, HAMILTON.

Yesterday.— (Before H. W. Northcroft, Esq., R.M., His Worship the Mayor, S. T. Seddon, Esq., J.P. and W. Steele, Esq., J.P.) HemiKarenaHopa, was charged with a breach of the Vagrant Act, by being in the house of Pene Ngahiwi at half -past one on the night of the 2nd January, without lawful excuse. Mr Quick acted as interpreter. Prisoner pleaded guilty. Sergeant McGovern stated the case was a trifling one and the prisoner bore a good character. Prisoner was severely reprimanded and discharged.

The Cattle Stealing Case. Grove Vow less was charged with stealing a heifer from William White, of Hamilton East. Mr O'Neill for accused. Sergeant McGovem stated that this case had been heard before and dismissed Since then additional evidence had been obtained, and he had laid a fresh information. William White stated that in the early part of 1881 he was the owner of a strawberry heifer. He lost it last November. The heifer in the paddock is the one the witness described the beast, and stated he had reared the heifer from a calf ami fed it for three months, and then turned it on the run with his other cattle ; in winter it was in the habit of coining home to be fed, Never was a week without seeing the calf till the time it was lost. As soon as I nm&sed the heifer I searched for it for three days without success. Some time prior to missing the calf I saw accused ith it ; he was driving it with other cattle belonging to me. I asked him what he was doing with my cattle, and he said he was trying to get a young bull away. He did not claim the heifer. After I missed the heifer I asked accused if he had seen my heifer. He said no. I said, it is veiy strange, I have not seen the heifer since I saw you driving it off the run. If you have driven it away the sooner you bring it back the better. Accused made no reply. After waiting a week I placed the matter in the hands of Constable Mm my. I said I suspected the accused. The value of the heifer Mas £3. Mr Reid complained to me about this heifer trespassing on Mr Claude's property, i asked him not to pound it, and I would take it away. This was about nine months since After she was stolen I next saw her in the police paddock, Hamilton East. I identified mine from amongst others, but I said she was much altercd,being blacker and poorer. I never noticed my heifer had a broken horn before I lost her. Cross-examined by Mr O'Neill : When I saw the heifer she was much altered ; she had grown blacker in appearance. She looked blacker though being starved. I used to see the heifer every week, or oftener, but I never noticed the damaged horn. When I was last examined 1 stated that the heifer used to run and never wandered to the back of the bush. The boast used sometimes to run toClaude's, I knew this last time I was examined. I am not going to tell you why I did not state this on that occasion. It is a customary thing for people, when they want to get' their own cattle, to run in others with them. There is nothing suspicions in that. Accused was driving other cattle of mine besides the heifer. If accused claimed the heifer as his own, his natural reply to my question, when I asked him if he had seen the heifer, would be " No." I did not describe the heifer. I will swear accused knew the heifer I meant. I cannot give yoii any grounds for swearing accused knew the heifer I meant. [At this stage, the witness got very confused, and it Avas almost impossible to elicit the meaning of his answers.] I have seen accused driving cattle frequently, but I do not think that is part of his ordinary business. I do not know whether he deals i-i cattle. Young Coop brought me to the police paddock to see the beasts. There might have been eight or nine head in the paddock. There was no other strawberry heifer. This was the first time I saw the damaged horn. I have been close to her very often. I told Constable Murray she was so much altered I hardly knew her. I believe Constable Murray said, " Go and look at your beast." I understood from the constable that my beast was in the paddock. I identified hey immediately. I recognised her by her colour, and the slit in her ear. [The witness underwent a long and searching cross-examination with a view to show he was mistaken in the identity of the beast, but the above were the most salient points elicited. Considerable merriment was caused in Court by the indignant manner in which the witness answered the questions put to him.] The witness was briefly re-examined by •Sergt. McGovern on a few minor points in his evidence. %> W. J. Le Quesne said : I know accused • %ftcb Mr White. I know some of Mr cattle. I know a strawberry toiler belonging to Mr White. I used to se& it on the run nearly every day with one of ours, I missedthem both' in November last. I searched but could not find either of them. There was no other heifer on the run uimU*r<to. Mr. White's. I next saw the heifer iin> the police paddock on the 14th of December; ;Mr Coop asked me to go down, an^ .identify our twit, I my Mr Wbite'slw tiwre.

The heifer in the Court-house paddock is the one belonging to Mr White. I have known the heifer seven or eight months. Cross - examined by Mr O'Neill : Cattle sometimes wander. 'I know nothing of the Hamilton run except round about the town. Strawberry cattle are not common on the run. I know a few. Most of the cattle I see have got slit ears. My reason for saying that the heifer belonged to Mr White is that Mr White told me so ; some boys told me so as well. I used to see the beast often, sometimes close and sometimes a good distance away. If the horn had been damaged or broken during the last six months I think I must have noticed it. When I saw her in the police paddock I did not notice any difference in her appearance except that she looked dusty. Sergt. McGovern re-examined the witness as to details of his evidence, but nothing of any material importance was elicited. George Reed said : I remember the 24th of December. I saw a heifer in the police paddock on that day ; the heifer belonged to Mr White. I have seen Mr White driving the heifer with his own cows at different times. On one or two occasions I complained to him that his cattle were running on Mr Claude's place. They were taken away after I complained; the heifer in question was one of the cattle. I have seen the heifer at different times on the run. Ido not know any other cattle with the same earmark as Mr White's. I never noticed the horn was damaged in the police paddock. I noticed the horn was scaled. I have known the heifer 11 or 12 months. Cross-examined by Mr O'Neill : I base my belief that the heifer belonged to Mr White upon the grounds that I have seen i him driving it, and also that when he removed his cattle from Claude's the heifer was taken also. Ido not recollect White ever pointing out the heifer and saying it was his. It is not the general custom to drive cattle off the run promiscuously in order to ch-aft out your own. I have never mentioned the strawberry heifer individually to Mr \Vhite as trespassing. I simply said his cattle. I have seen the heifer fifteen or twenty times during the last twelve months. I have not seen many cattle with slit eai-s about Hamilton. Cattle on the run are generally branded. The broken horn is about an inch and a-half shorter than the other. Re-examined by Sergt. McGovern : I don't know that ever I saw Mr White drive any cattle but his own. I cannot say whether the cattle running on Claude's were ear-mai'ked. I have seen similar cattle about Hamilton. Jas. Thos. Boon said, on the 29th of December I examined a heifer in the police paddock, Hamilton East. I have been told by several parties that it belonged to Mr White. The heifer in the Court-house yard is the one I saw in the police paddock. I know some of Mr White's cattle. I never saw the heifer running with them. I never noticed any beast similar to this one on the Hamilton run. Cross-examined by Mr O'Neill, but nothing of importance elicited. By the Court : I do not know whether there are many cattle on the run with slit ears. John Coleman said : On the 15th of March last I was at Buckland's sale at Cambridge. I saw accused there. I saw him buy three or four calves, two red, one yellow, and" one strawberry calf ; it was a very dark strawberry. I noticed this one pai ticula 1 ly, because it was a a cal calf ;it was not quiet. I know Mr White's heifer. The heifer that Vowless bought in Cambridge is not at all like the one now in the paddock. This heifer sometimes used to break into an aoi i o of ours, and I complained to Mr White about it ; tliat is liom I first knew White was the owner of it. I have constantly seen Mr White driving this calf in compjny with its mother. I swear positively that is Mr White's, I have not s&eu any calves like this one on the run. Cross-examined by Mr O'Neill : To the best of my belief the dark stiawberry calf belonged to M r Wallace. I swear accused bought it at Buckland's sale. I swotti 1 it was not a ligjit strawberry calf. White's calf bioko into my acio ftevQiv}! times ; two or three times to my own knowledge. Tiio calf used generally to run with its mother and another cow. I never saw this calf except in company with its mother. I never saw Mr White driving the cow homo without the calf. I have sotin it running with other calves. Calves change tinpcar.uice vei'y often during growth, lied calves change the least. I cannot say whether there are many cattlu on the run M'ith a slit in the ear. Re-examined by Mr McGovern : Mr White has other cows which I fancy are ear-marked, but I am not quite sure. By the Court : I remember this beast so minutely because it was offered to me as venl. Waller Coop, said : I know accused deals in cattle. Have bought cattle from, him from time to time. I was with the accused on the Hamilton run on the Bth of November. We found the heifer and drove it to accused's residence. Took this heifer with some others to Oha ipo sale Accused was with inc. This heifer was offered for sale in Vowless' name. Have seen it to-day in the Courthouse paddock. It is the one we took to the sale. lam not certain what the reservo on it was. The beast was not sold. As we were driving it home I purchased it with some others, viz.: a white steer and a strawbeny heifer. The price was 23s each. There was no money or receipt passed between us at that time. I sold them to Hinton for 30s each. I afterwards exchanged with Hinton, giving him three other calves in place of those I had sold him. I told Hinton I wanted to give the two heifers back to Yowless. On the 7th December We took them to the Oho-upo sale. They were offered for sale in my name, but not sold. On return from this sale I went with accused to his mother's house. Mrs Vowless told mo Sergeant McGovern had been making enquiries about the cattle that had been sold to Hinton. She said we had better see Sergeant McGovern. I saw Sergeant McGovern myself that night, but accused did not come all the j way with me. At the police paddock Mr White did not immediately identify the beast. Cross-examined by Mr O'Neill : As i soon as White got inside the gate he said his boast was not there. Constable Murray told him to go into the paddock and look. The three of us went in, and White again said, "No, it is not there." Afterwards he said, "Wait a minute, and let me look." He then identified the heifer in question, but said he could not swear to it. At the last hearing of this case I heard Constable Murray contradict my evidence j but I still assert that my statements are true. The beasts were driven openly. The witness was re-examined by Sergeant McGovern as to the description of beaits given to Hinton in exchange for the others. By the Court ! The beasts I gave Hinton were entirely my own. Accused had no interest in any of the cattle I took to the sale from my own place. Accused and I help each other in driving cattle in a friendly way. I have paid Vowless for the cattle I bought from him, but have no receipt. • At S.SO.pim.ithe, Court; adjourned till 10 o'clock this (Thursday; morning.