FARMER ON TRIAL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIV, Issue 19799, 21 November 1927, Page 11

FARMER ON TRIAL.

BOUNDARY* PEGS REMOVED. PENALTY OF £SO IMPOSED. ACQUITTED OF SHEEP-STEALING. ( [BY TELEGRAPH. —OWN CORRESPONDENT.] WANGAJfTJf. Saturday. Two cases presenting remarkable features have been disposed of in the Supreme Court. A ycang farmer, Robert J. Clinton, was charged with having removed boundary pegs on his holding, and with stealing three sheep belonging to W. G. Moore, farmer. 1 In the former case George Allen, a bushman, alleged that Clinton, when clearing bush between his boundary and that of Moore's farm adjoining, had removed two pegs on the boundary line. These pegs were thrown on to Moore's property. Witness said the pegs were moved when he was in town. When he returned to the bush and saw what his employer had done he told Clinton it was a dangerous thing to do. He had notified the police, and when Detective Revell, a surveyor, and others, went to investigate they had found evidences of, pegs being removed as alleged by Allen. Explanation by Accused. When Detective Revell asked for an explanation, Clinton gave him a written statement declaring that he had moved the pegs in question, as he was falling bush on the line, and had thrown them on to a clearing on Moore's property to prevent them being burned when the fire was consuming the fallen bush. He did not know at the time it was wrong to rempve pegs under the conditions, as his father, an old farmer of the district, had instructed him always to remove pegs from the danger zone when burning off bush. Mr. Justice Ostler, in summing-up, said if the jury was satisfied the pegs were removed with an honest intention, it could bring in a verdict of guilty, but with a rider attached " removed with honest mind," and he would impose only an insignificant penalty. The jury returned in about ten minutes with a verdict of guilty, but with a rider to the effect that accused committed the offence with an honest mind. His Honor said the costs of the Crown were £sl, so he would impose a fine of £SO. The case of sheep stealing occupied two days and an evening. For the prosecution it was alleged that Clinton on three occasions went out with George Allen, whom he had employed as bush feller, and killed sheep on Moore's Sunnyface property, which included high country. It was alleged ho carried a sheep back in each instance to the camp, and consumed them. Allegation of Vendetta. The evidence for the defence was a complete denial of the charges. Accused said be had never been over the Sunnyface property shooting with Allen. Two experts, one of whom said he had never seen Clinton before, gave evidence to the effect that wool shown in Court came from carcases which had been dead about 12 months, and could not have come from the skin of a killed sheep which had been bled. Evidence was also given that the country abounded in wild pigs, and that accounted for the fact that no bones were found. Mr. Cohen, solicitor for the defence, maintained in his address that Clinton was really the victim of a vendetta. The Crown prosecutor, Mr. Cunningham, denied this, and deplored unfairness shown to witnesses of the Crown. The Judge severely criticised Mr. Cohen's allegation. He advised .the jury if there was any possible chance of it bringing in a verdict of not guilty to add a rider exonerating witnesses for the Crown from conspiracy, as alleged. The jury, in about an hour and a-half, returned a verdict- of not guilty. „ When asked by the Judge if they had any rider to add, the foreman of the jury answered " No."