Magistrate's Court, Queenstown.

Lake Wakatip Mail, Issue 1519, 12 February 1886, Page 5

Magistrate's Court, Queenstown.

Monday, Bth February, 1886.

(Before H. S. Hickson, Esq., R.M.) LARCETY.

Patrick Vail was charged, on the information of John M 'Bride, with having, on the 26th January last, cut down nine trees, etc., on section 11, block 111., Upper Wakatipu, adjoining the dwelling house of the said John M'Bride, of Greenstone, with intent to feloniously steal, take, and carry away the same, thereby doing injury to the said John M'Bride to the amount of £3O. Mr Turton appeared for prosecutor. The accused was undefended.

John M*Bride, settler. Greenstone, deposed that section 11., block 111., Upper Wakatipu was his freehold property and adjoined his dwelling house. On the 26th of last month he saw accused on the ■lid section cutting down trees on it. Although spoken to accused made no answer, and witness then went to the steamer Antrim and returned in company with Alex. M'Bride. He again called on accused to desist, but the latter made no answer. A. M'Bride then said it was no une; accused heard but would not speak, and it would be better to go for the sergeant of police at ouce. Accused then said :—"Go away ; you have no right here, I have paid Adair for cuttiug wood here." Witness said if he did not knock off it would be as dear a day's work as ever he had done. Accused said witness could summons him. Witness saw three birch, six broadleaf, and five or six maple trees cut down. Came down to Qneenstown and laid the prtscnt information, and when he returned with the ■ rgiant of police, accused was cutting wood opposite the house, and had cleared a strip half a chain wide by three chains long of every tree on it, taking everything before him. Witness valued the injury to his property at £IOO. On the 30th of last month he put it down at £SO, but accused had done fully as much more damage before witness returned. Accused must have known the land was witness', as be objected to witness taking it up years ago under agricultural lease. End also in IS*>3, to the purchase of same as freehold. Cross-examined—ln reply to questions, I told vou togoato Mr Adair for the boundry of my land. I consider the four acres of freehold worth something. Re-examined—lt was on the second or third day after I returned with the sergeant that accused asked the above questions. Alexander M 'Bride, mariner, deposed to having accompanied previous witness to the place where accused was cutting wood on section 11, block 111., Upper Wakatipu. He corroborated the evidence of previous witness, and also averred that accused, in reply to informant, said: —"I have paid Adair for right to sell wood and am going to cut it." Ho al«o said:—"You broke down my fence, and broke into my hut, and I will make it dear for somebody." If the property was his own witness said he would not like the damage done for £2O; this was not the market value for the timber cut, but it included the disfigurement of informant's property. Cross-examined—He could swear that the timber cut down was worth £1; could not say how much more unless the wood was stacked, but believed it was over a cord, which was worth 9s. or 10s. a cord at the stump near the lake side. Reexamined—Accused had made breaks in three auctions of the bush, and spoilt it. Sergeant W. M'Leod, stationed at Qneenstown, deposed to having, on the Ist instant, served a summons on accused, who ?aid, in reply to a remark, that he had a license to cut wood, ami should go on cutting. Witness advised him not to until the case was heard, and he then desisted. The evidence of previous witnesses was corroborated. Crow-examined—You toll me that informant would not show you the boundary of his land. 11. M. Adair, Crown Lands ranger, deposed that accused had a license two years ago to cut timber at the (Ireenston 0 , hut lie had no The licence ran out in December 31, iSs4. On the iot'u of last month Mr Morgan, of Qneenstown, said that accused had left £1 with him for a to cut timber at the Greenstone. Witness replied he coulJ not grant a license until he had been on the qround, because informant and accused were always having rows over the land. Accused came to wituess some tune before and asked if informant had any right to cut timber at the Greenstone and witness replied no. except on his own freehold. Could not say whether the timber alleged to have been cut was growing on informant's freehold. (Witness here read a lengthy report brought up some time ago, in which he objected to denuding the country of ornamental bush opposite the Lake at the (ironstone. He had also similarly reserved bush at Halfway Bay.) Cross-examined—l remember meeting you one morning when you asked where M'Bride's Loundry was.

Tlie evidence for the prosecution bavin? been read over, accused, in reply to the usual questions, stated that seven years he had fenced in some of the ground on which the timl>er was, ami before informant applied for his lease. Three year's later informant's application to purchase the land was refused, oo the ground that he had not improved the same, and accused had not since seen any notification of informant applying for the land. He had no idea that informant had any private property at the <ireenstoiie. He was in Queenstown the other day, and made up his miml to take up a residence area. Mr Adair, in reply to a (juestion, stated that informant bad no private property altove the public road at Greenstone. Accused left £1 for a miners right, and got a form for a residence area, and put up a notice according to the rules.

His Worship said he considered a prima facia case had been nude out, and accused would therefore be committed to take his trial at the Supreme Court sitting, to lie held at Invercargill on Tuesday, the 30th March next. Bail was allowed —accused in £J">. and turn sureties for a similar amount each.

J. Wenkhcim v. M. Brich.---Adjourned till Friday (this day), at request of Mr Smith, counsel for the defence.

S. Betts i. P. Rattigan (an adjourned case).— Claim for £l7 19a. 10d., goods supplied. Mr Smith, for plaintiff. Mr Torton, for defendant, pleaded not indebted. After some contention between counsel, Mr Smith called defendant.

P. Rattigan, in cross-examination, admitted that he was indebted to plaintiff in the amount claimed, hut he had paid her authorised agent, Mr F. H. Daniel (receipt we here produced, signed " F. H. Daniel, per S. G. Daniel. ') Paid the amount l>y promissory note drawn in favor of B. P. Robinson, to whom plaintiff owed money. (Mr Smith here declined to recognise the receipt, as the agent (F. H. Daniel) could not delegate hie authority to a sab-agent.) To Mr Turtou—l did not promise to pay plaintiffs solicitor, although I would have done so if I had got the promissory note hack, but could not To the Bench—Made the promissory note in favor of Robiuson at the request of plaintiffs ag-nt.

B. P. Robiuson deposed to the promissory note referred to Wing made in his favor, as plaintiff purchased mining shares from him for £3O. and was at the tune owing a balance of £l4. He took the note A3 part payment, but it would uot be matured till the 14th or loth instant. To Mr Turton—Plaintiff still owed him £1 13s. To Mr Smith—He had not received £ I 13s more then he was entitled to—that was according to his books. There was no arrangement with plaintiff to cry quits. Mr Turton submitted that the amount claimed had lieen paid ; also, that S. 0. Daniel had inserted in the L.akk Wakatip Mail r* debts, and had received money as sub-art nt for F. H. Daniel. Mr Smith cited authorities to show that no sub* agent was allowed to act for an ageut, he also stated that a considerable amount of money had been collected for plaintiff, and no account rendered. His Worship, in giving judgment, said he was quite aware that F. H. Darnel was plaintiffs agent, as per advertisement (which had not been contradicted), and also that he had no right to delegate his authority to another person. He blamed Mr Daniel for the whole affair, and was sorry for defendant, who had evidently paid the amount in good faith. Judgment for plaintiff, for amount claimed, with coat*, £3 17s. [Tha rttnaiauW of nport is held om.)