FARMERS AT LAW

Grey River Argus, 24 June 1925, Page 2

FARMERS AT LAW

WHAT HAPPENED AT RURU. CLAIAI FOR £350. A somev. hat unusual action was commenced in the Supreme Court yestvr. 1 lay afternoon, before His Honour, Mr Justice Alpers, when James Ryan, farmer, al Ruru, proceeded against Mrs Isabella Chamberlain, also of Ruru, on ' i i \ arious counts. I 'The statement of claim set out that I defendant, by her agents (a man nain. D ed Mallinson, and her two sons) look | down the fence enclosing the plain- I , tiff's land and mustered plaintiff’s I . stock. During such operations, it is * alleged, six heifers were killed, and ■ defendant, by her action, had convert- | ( ed the stock mu,stored to her own 'The total amount of damage claimed ! , is £39(1, made up as follows: £6O for i stock killed; £230 for stock removed and not returned; £25 for trespass, and £75 wrongful conversion of stock. Cost of the action and such other re_ , lief as the Court might see fit to award were also mentioned. 'l’he case oecujiied the attention of the Court during the afternoon, and was continued last evening. Air W. J. Joyce is appearing for de- 1 fondant, and Mr W. McCarthy for | plaintiff. 'The facts, as set out by counsel for I plaintiff (Mr W. McCarthyj are that his client, who is a farmer residing at Rotomanu, is the owner of a property of 71»9 acres at Ruru, vv V:<di is fenced. 'l'he farm was stockevu Last Anzae Day plaintiff, who resided three or four miles away from the farm in question, went up to the propertv, and discovered no stock on the place. A number of stock were afterwards found dead. He complained to the police, and investigation was at once made. When defendants were approached, they admitted that the stmk iiad been taken off by them. iNidence pointed to the fact that the fences ; iiad been taken down and replace.l. Since (hat lime plaintiff had been unable in .race the stock. 'The only so_ i; i ti ilia! could be found was that •.he stock had been taken out by Chamlicrhiin am| not replncmL 'The locality v. hen* the farm it situated, counsel said, is a lonely one, and there was tittle chance of the acts being wifuess<■<l by anybody. Altogether, 31 head if stock weie missed, the value placed on them by plaintiff being £1(1 a he:, I. In e\ideii(*e, plaintiff stated that he saw Mallinson on his (plaintiff's) pro. p(*rty. 'i'he re[>ly was that Mallinson !md been dogging cattle. 'The admission was made that no one had authorised him to go on the property. I Witness showed Mallinson two dead ln'ifers he had discovered, and MaL linson said they had died from eating ferns. Witness made an appointment with Mallinson for the following Thursday, for the purpose of instituting a search for further dead cattle. Mallinson did not keep the appointment, so witness and his brother made la search. 'They found four dead, and {one alive. 'l'he last-named was :i red hk’ifer, with one ear bitt<*n otT. Li witness’s opinion it had been bitten olf by a dog. Witness added that the fences had been interfered with. in one place the fence was propped up wi{h sticks, and the staples were gone. 'I he following witness instituted a further search, and discovered two more dead animals. Mrs (’iiamberlain told witness that she had employed Mallinson to muster the cattle. and bad given him £1 for doing so. She had also admitted that they hail shot nine beasts. A further enquiry of Airs Chamberlain elicited the information that Alallinson and h *r two sons had done the musrering. His Honour held that evidence regarding the Chamberlains had not. been established, as there were live or six sons working in the district. / 'To Air McCarthy: Witness had discovered one heifer against an old tree The animal’s ears were bitten and torn about, and then* was blood on the ground. She had the appearance of having been lighting dogs. Continuing, witness stated that a mile and a half of fencing had been knocked about. His Honour: 'They must have been verv busy to damage a mile and a half of your fencing. Witness: It was knocked about everywhere. Cross-examined by Mr Joyce, witness stated that the fences were erected about two years ago. Prior to the land being fenced, it was overrun by a number of bulls and cattle. Witness did not know if these animals had been fenced in. No wild bulls had been shot down to witness’s i knowledge. He did not know if there j were any bulls there belonging to MaL J linson. In Afarch, 1924, witness bought I IS heifers at the Rotomanu sale. The j animals were eighteen months to two j years old. 'Then* were 32 on the land • altogether, the other 14 having been i reared by witness. He was not aware of the fact that a large number of cattle in the district had died through eating fern. Wincss had known cattle to lie down on a road and die after being dogged. At this stage the Court adjourned until 7.15 p.m. After the Court resumed, William Arthur Calwell, police constable, stationed at Otira, was called. Witness stated that he had interviewed Robert Chamberlain, a son of defendant, who stated that he had taken some of his mother’s cattle off Ryan’s property, and had used a number of plaintiff’s

cattle, in order to drive his mother’s. ( hamberlain stated that he had returned Ryan's cattle. Witness interviewed Mrs Chamberlain regarding the driving off of Ryan’s cuttle. She denied having employed Mr Alallinson to do it. but admitted having paid him £1 for one day’s work. William Vallance, farmer. residing nt Ruru. said he accompanied Mr Ryan to his farm one day to look al some heifers. They discovered four dead ones. One of the animals had a broken neck, caused through falling down a bank. The place was not by any means a dangerous one. The other heifers hud the appearance of having been aborted, which could be caused by excessive driving. The fences on the property had been tampered with, otherwise they were in good condition. He would estimate that, when found, the animals would have been dead from seven to ten days. r l <) Mr Joyce: 'there was some hair of the heifer that hud broken its neck on top of the bank. Witness did not ’ trace the tracks of the animals from Ryan’s property on to the road. William Larkin, farmer residing at Rotomanu, gave evidence similar to that of the previous witness. Jack Ryan, brother of the plaintiff, deposed to finding four dead cattle on his brother’s farm at Ruru. Witness corroborated the statements of previous witness regarding the condition of the animals. To Air Joyce: Witness had never hoard of cattle dying in the locality through eating ferns. James M(‘Millan, farmer of Rotomanu, gave corroborative evidence. Cross-examined by Mr Joyce, witness stated that Mr Mallinson had “made a joke’’ of the fact that when he put dugs on to a beast, he did not know when he was going to get • them off. The evidence of John McDonald, ! farmer of Bell Hill, went to show [ that he was present 'when Mr Ryan • asked Mr Mallinson if he were dogging cattle on his (Mr Ryan’s) property. Air Mallinson’s reply was to (the effect that he was. Witness was ’of opinion that if Air Alallinson’s dogs ‘“sorted out’’ a cow, they would tear it to pieces. To Mr Joyce: He was aware of the fact that Mr Mallinson was a drover of thirty years’ standing. Evidence was also given in support of plaintiff’s claim by Arthur Robinson junr., of Te Kinga; Arthur Robinson senr., manager of the Te Kinga Land and Sawmill Company; and Alphonse Weaver, employed in the National Mortgage and Agency Company, Greymouth. This concluded the case for the plaintiff, and the Court adjourned at 9.15 till 9.30 o’clock this morning.