Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

MAGISTRATE'S COURT, KUROW.

YESTERDAY. ■', r\(Before ;-Mr T. Hutchison, S.M.).

Police v Robert M'llwraith. The de: fendant (Mr Hjorring) was charged with (1) cruellv ill-treating a hoTse for a period of seven weeks while it was suffering from a serious injury to its shoulder, and (2) with failing to ..provide the 'horse with sufficient food and water. Mr Lucas (for Ale=srs Hislop and Creagh), on behalf of the police, stated that on. the 22nd December last the defendant was carting a heavv 4oad of wool, when the horse fell and "injured its shoulder. It was afterwards placed in a paddock by the defendant, and so far as could be ascertained nothing had been done, although it was suffering from an open wound, ana the shoulder had been so badly bruised tlmt the horse could not put- its foot to the ground. After a lengthy hearing, in which the defendant stated that he had bathed the horse's leg for a fortnight after the accident, and had given it water for four davs. after which time he came to the conclusion that it could get water in the paddock. The Magistrate dismissed, the information for ill-treatment, and fined the defendant £lO for not providing the horse with proper food and water,- with £4 6s 8d costs. Inspector of Stock (Mr Lucas) v. H, M'llwraith; failing to destroy rabbits. Defendant was fined £5, with costs £1 Bs. Inspector of Stock (Mr Lucas) v. John A. Shea; failing to destroy rabbits. Defendant was fined 40s, and costs £1 Bs. Inspector of Stock (Mr Lucas) v. John Matches ; failing .to destroy rabbits. Defendant was fined 20s. and costs £1 Bs. Inspector of Stock (Mr Lucas) v. Richard T. Stringer: failing to destroy rabbits. Defendant was fined ss, without costs. A. Bloxham (Mr Lucas) v. Fisher and Bar; claim. £l6 15s. Judgment was given for plaintiff for amount claimed, with £5 9s costs. A. Bloxham v. Fisher. Judgment for amount claimed and costs. A prohibited person was fined 20s and costs 7s, for procuring liquor during the currency of a prohibition order.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/OAM19090313.2.35

Bibliographic details

Oamaru Mail, Volume XXXVI, Issue 10096, 13 March 1909, Page 4

Word Count
345

MAGISTRATE'S COURT, KUROW. Oamaru Mail, Volume XXXVI, Issue 10096, 13 March 1909, Page 4

MAGISTRATE'S COURT, KUROW. Oamaru Mail, Volume XXXVI, Issue 10096, 13 March 1909, Page 4

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert