MASEFIELD V. ROTANA.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXVI, Issue 2918, 28 March 1891, Page 2

MASEFIELD V. ROTANA.

Vm.i ca'io was heard in the Supreme C'eart, Auuklaud, on Tuesday last, before Mr Justice Comiolly u,ud a jury of lour. Mr Campbell appeared for the plaiutilT, and Mr Alexander, instructed by Mr Swarbtiek, appeared for the defendant in the absence of Mr Macgregor Hay, who is engaged conducting the Huntly eases. The plaintiff claimed certain machinery, or :C;>00, and £100 damagesIn reply, the defendant alleged that the taid machinery had become his property by being atlixed to the laud. It appears; I hat p'aintiiY sold the machinery fora Hivmill to .\jr Park, of Huntly, and the h:iicr, by niUtako, erected the mill ou deieudaiiLs laud without Ilia authority. Theciiso turned upon the manner in which the imcNUU'ry md been ervcti'd. 31r I'irk and Mr kalph unvu (.videnee for the pi. inn!}, and M \ssra Bnrd and Lisle, eiujiuttra, i!:ive evidence tor the defence. B .lh ]) irtiyj agreed that thu mneliinery was bolted to wooden frames or block;, but whilst: the pl;tintiH"a witnesses alleged the fiMiiuis and blocks li'jd bc«u hid on the ground, the witnessffl for the: defence stated thai timy weie lix.il in the ground. His Honi.ni: - ruled that. i£ the miehiuery wis ij.iitel t-j friitnes 'j'.block.s let into the ground then, under the circumstances »i h this onw, ihc uiaeliiucry was atlixed to the land, ami directed the jury to find (I) weiv rhu sole Jiieces or blocks !i:l iuto the (/round ? (2) iii c.ii'iH the [jlniuliil t:iccxeds in i.iitain :ir_' judgment uii a point o< law, to v, Inl d.iinakua is ho untitlcd ? ']'!)• jury 1 ,r, u ,l for the defendant, on the urouiM th.iS. Ihe sole pieces were lei iuto the ground,, and they assessed the to Iv [k\\ J to the plaintitl' in ease of his judgmeut at the full amouut oliumed" Jiij {lua--.-ur therefore gnv« j.idgnifnt, fur lee detendant with CO.-.1.-, l)us wit,b leave for the plaintilf to move to enter judgineut for the plaintiff for £400, or delivery of machinery and £100.