S.M. COURT.

Bush Advocate, Volume XX, Issue 1003, 15 April 1908, Page 8

S.M. COURT.

THIS DAY. (Before Mr S. E~McCarthy, S.M.) ALLEGED ASSAULT. William Newfaervy was charged tli.it on April 11th he ilitl commit an assault on Elizabeth Koyt with in r tent to commit a crime. Sergeant Cruickshank, who prosecuted, explained that there was some doubt as to accused's sanity, and he was remanded to Napier for eight days for medical observation. ALLEGED SHEEP STEALING. Robert Watson was charged "with the theft of six sheep, tlie property of Jeremiah Hayes, of Umutaoroa. Sergeant Cruichshank prosecuted, and Mr Lloyd appeared for the defendant, who pleaded not guilty. Charles janie^ Annett, accountant at the Dannevirke branch of the New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Company, ssftd that on 27th March Watson entered 54 sheep at the company's sale 3 at Dannevirke. They were sold to George Beatty at 3s lOd each. On the same day Mr Hayes put hi an estopel against' the proceeds of six ewes, sold amongst tlie lot. Watson had since been paid for the. full number of sheep, las he maintained that they were all his. Witness understood Watson to say that he bought the six sheep in question from Dalgety and Co. last August. To Mr Lloyd : The esto]>el put in", by Hayes was written by witness and signed by Hayes. Watson settled up with the company on 10th April, and gave them a letter of indemnity. There was no record in the books to show what sort of ewes they were, and lie did not know whether they were young or old. They miglit have been old from tlie price they realised. Jeremiah Hayes, settler at Umniaroa, deposed that his farm was about half a mile from that of accused's. Witness had over 800 sheep and lambs running on his place. He was not in Dannevirke on the 27th March last, but in consequence of something which one of his neighbors told him he came into town on the following morning, and ivent to the sale-yards in. company with Sergeant Cruickshank, Mr Beatty, and Bain, the Loan and Mercantile Agency Co.'s auctioneer. They saw some sheep there, and after examining them lie recognised six with his earmark on them. The earmark produced was his. The sheep had two triangles on the centre of the left ear. The sheep were his, and he claimed them. He had sold no similar sheep for 13 months. His fences were sheep proof last March, but before that the sheep could have got out as part of his fences had been burned. Tlie sheep in the yard were woolbranded, but on the others than the six the brand was dry and hard, and had apparently been on for months, but on the six claimed by witness, the. brand was fresh, and looked as if it had only been on a few days. The paint came off on his fingers when he felt it, as it was not dry. He had mustered and tallied his sheep since 27th March, and he found about 20 short. He could not account for the loss. He valued the sheep at about Gs per head. Witness had seen accused about the sheep on Saturday. 28th, and asked how he managed to make such a mistake as to take six sheep of his. Accused got annoyed about tlie matter, and said he had bought the sheep. On another day witness said that if he (Watson) would give him back the six sheep he 'would say nothing more about the matter. Witness had met him that day again, and in course of conversation he had remarked that he firmly believed Watson had made a mistake in taking the sheep to the yai"ds, and if he had given the sheep, up nothing more would be said. Accused remarked that if witness had allowed him to say that he had bought the sheep, he would have given them up, and also the proceeds of the sale. He further said that- lie did not want any court business over it, and witness had better see his lawyer. The six shee]> in tlie saleyards had been earmarked as lambs, and the triangle was clearly defined. (Left Sitting.)