CIVIL SITTINGS.

Auckland Star, Volume XLI, Issue 38, 14 February 1910, Page 5

CIVIL SITTINGS.

(Before his Honor Mr Justice Edwards.) ALL ABOUT PIGS. AN" EXTRAORDINARY CASE. In an action Trevor v. Hayes, the plaintiff appealed against a decision given In the Magistrate's Court at Waimate North. Mr. T. Cotter appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. J. R. Reed for the defendant. Mr. T. Cotter, for the plaintiff, explained that the action had been brought as an appeal against the decision of Mr. Florance, S.M., at the Magistrate's Court, Waimate North. It was an appeal on facts and law. The plaintiff had been ordered to pay damages to the extent of £61 for the trespass of his 30 pigs on defendant's land, damages having been assessed at the rate of 2/ per day per pig. Mr. Cotter contended that under section 14 of the Impounding Act, damages should not have been given on a total number of 30 pigs. There were only 12 full-grown pigs; the rest were sucklings. Under the Act, it was clearly defined that a suckling of any species and its mother should be considered as one animal. l n this case, therefore, the sucklings and their mother should have been counted as one animal only, and damages assessed accordingly. His Honor: What if two or three of the sucklings had been shot? Mr. Cotter: Then part of the animal, according to law, would have been shot. Mr. Cotter further contended that the Magistrate's decision had not been according to law, and the appellant should succeed, and the case should be sent back for further trial to ascertain how many sucklings there were. His Honor: The magistrate has been transferred somewhere else. What could, therefore, be done? Air. L'otter: 1 do not think Mr. Florance has left his district yet. Mr. Reed, in addressing the Bench for the defendant, contended that section 14 of the Act applied to cattle, and not to pigs. He dealt at length with the circumstances of the case, and urged that if his Honor was satisfied that the magistrate had done substantial justice, on the facts as represented by the evidence, that judgment should be upheld. His Honor: If I send this case back to the magistrate, who is to pay costs T Mr. (.otter: The defendant. His Honor: No, I do not think so. If there is a mistake, it is the magistrate's mistake. His Honor said it was a most extraordinary case. According to Mr. Cotter's contention, there had never been a whole pig on the property, and only portions of different pigs. It showed the absurdity of the Legislature making one word mean half a dozen different words. He would give his decision later. Mr. Reed said he thought it likely that he and Mr. Cotter would be able to come to a private settlement in the meantime. MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL. Application for a new trial was made by Montague Garnaut in the case brought by him against James P. Bennett, foi alleged slander. Mr. Burton appeared for the plaintiff, and urged that a new trial should be granted on the ground that the verdict o£ the jury, -was against, the weight of evidence, and that he how had new and important evidence to submit. He quoted authorities in support of his motion, and went very fully into the various phases of the evidence submitted at the firs' trial. (Proceeding.)