Farmer Clubs Dog To Death

Northern Advocate, 16 March 1939, Page 8

Farmer Clubs Dog To Death

After having lost a number of sheep through worrying by dogs, Robert Henry Leslie, well-known Topane farmer, noticed an apparently unattended dog on the roadside and clubbed it to death with a heavy piece of wood.

The incident occurred on the Matanri Bay Road on February 25. Leslie’s action was, however, observed by two young Maori women hiding in the roadside scrub. The sequel took place in the Kaeo Court yesterday when, together with an employee, Hori Hou. he faced charges of causing the dog unnecessary suffering, and of committing mischief by causing the death of the dog, the property of Windy Samuels, and which was valued at £5.

The magistrate, Mr G. N. Morris, dismissed the charge of cruelty on the grounds that the first blow had probably rendered the animal unconscious.

On the second charge, however, Leslie was convicted and ordered to pay £5. the costs of the police inquiry, and to reimburse the owner £3 for the death of the dog. The first charge against Hou was also dismissed, but this defendant was convicted and discharged on the second count. 3 Maori Girls’ Evidence. The police case hinged on the evidence of the two girls, Ellen Hona, aged 22, and Julia Samuels, a sister of the owner of the animal, aged 16. These witnesses stated that they had been walking on the road with the dog in their care when they had seen the approach of a motor truck. Thinking that the vehicle contained a brother of the younger girl, who would object to her being on the road, both hid in the scrub at the roadside. When the vehicle came alongside, however, they saw that Leslie and Hou were the occupants, who alighted and whistled the dog. They then caught the animal and took it to a gum-hole, perhaps a 4 ’chain distant on the other side of the road, where Hou j held the dog while Leslie killed it with a stick.

The older girl stated that perhaps six heavy, deliberate blows were struck at the animal's head.

“The dog yelled after the first blow, but made no further noise," she said.

Terrified by Scene,

The younger girl had seen only one blow struck, and had heard no noise.

Both, however, had been terrified at Leslie’s action, and for this reason had not interfered, fearing that if they did so Leslie “might do the same to them.”

Several dogs had recently been found killed in the neighbourhood of the Matauri Bay settlement. Wind} 7 Samuels, owner of the animal, stated that it was an 18-month-old cattle dog. The spot where he had later found the dog on the advice of the two girls was within 20 chains of Leslie’s property. The dog was registered, but at the time of its death was not wearing a collar.

Evidence of the finding of the dog's body and of its injuries was given by Nuka Stewart and Dr. A. Sharp.

The latter stated that the animal showed signs of bruising on the neck and nose, and there were two fractures in the skull, either of which might have produced unconsciousness. Constable Edward Buckley produced a statement from Hou. in which was stated that Leslie had told him to catch the dog.

Hou had suggested that they “had bettor not kill ft, as the owner might come along." Leslie had struck it on the head three times, but it had made no outcry.

"Saw Black."

When interviewed, Leslie, stated Constable Buckley, said that, after having lost so many sheep, “every time lie saw a dog he saw black." Mr H. F. Guy. who appeared for the defence,-submitted that tin's was a case cf a settler who had seen an apparently stray dog wandering at large and had killed it.

Ho held that the killing had been a competent execution." However an animal was killed there

was a possibility of it being caused

some pain, said the magistrate. However, it appeared that in this case the animal had been rendered unconscious by the first blow, and it was for that reason that the charge of cruelty would be dismissed. He did not, however, approve of the manner of killing. > Leslie had not caught the dog worrying sheep, and had no colour of right to kill the animal on the roadway.

He had probably misapprehended his right to do so under the Dog Registration Act, and it was for this reason that a lenient view was taken of the case.