TANGLED TRAILS.

Grey River Argus, 29 November 1922, Page 2

TANGLED TRAILS.

MUCH ADO ABOUT” NOTHING. Pipes end piles, a washhouse and a verandah were all inextricably mixed up a case heard before Mr W. Meldrum, S.M., at the Magistrate’s Court yesterday. Plaintiff, Thomas Furlong, claimed from the defendant, Jackson, £’3s 2s Id special, and £l2 general damages for I repairs alleged to have been made to I the house which Furlong had rented to him. Mr W. J. Joyce, in setting out the I statement of claiiq, stated that-defend-ant, Jackson, had removed the back verandah, shortened a washhouse ami taken away the fowlhouse. Thomas Furlong said that in causeIquencc of information received he visited the house and found that the defendant had removed the back veran[dah, and shortened up the washhouse about seven feet. The fowlhouse had been fixed to the ground and when plaintiff called the first time it was still there. On a second call which he made he found that the fowlhouse and waterpipes had been removed. He had met the defendant who told him he would take both the houses and pipes away unless he got £2O compensation for improvements mad?. Mr H. F. -Doogan, on beucJf of the defendant, cross-examined Furiong at some length, as to whether the washhouse was joined to the house. The fowlhouse declared the plaintiff was fastened to the piles in the ground. Mr Joyce drew from Furlong the information that defendant had taken seven feet from the length of the washhouse and then boarded up the open end. ■Defendant said he had been refused admittance to the house by Mrs Jackson, who told him. that they had secured a house, but they might be one month or three before getting’ into it. John Grace, a storekeeper, .said that the back verandah had been removed and he could see where the verandah had been fixed to the wall. The washhouse had been shortened and there was a new weatherboard wa’i on the end of it. The pipes were connected io the premises from the main, in I-he street. He found that the alterations stated in the claim had been made. William Hill an architect stated that the back verandah and the other building had been removed before lie ed the scene. Finally he drew a sketch to show the relative positions of the washhouse ami the house. Other -witnesses corroborated the evidence given by previous witnesses. Oswald Jackson, th-c defendant, said ■ that there was no fowlhouse on the premises when he shifted in. He bought a stable and shifting this tn his I own yard built a .fowlhouse with the ■ timber. He bought several loads of bricks which he sprdad out in the • yard. He took away with him. after leaving, only the iron off the roof, the r quartering on which the iron rested l and th-c wire netting from the fowlchouse. His son was a plumber and I i .'when he put in the piping’ he did not get his consent. Other witnesses were called and aft’J er legal argument, judgment was rei served.