SHEEP WORRYING.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19136, 2 April 1924, Page 5

SHEEP WORRYING.

CLAIM FOR DAMAGES SUCCEEDS. (Fbou Odb Own correspondent.) WELLINGTON, April 1. Reserved decision was Riven by Mr W. G. Riddell, S.M., in the Magistrate's t.'onrt to-day in the case Murray v. Tristram and Mia Tristram. Murray claimed £97 10s for losses caused through the killing in October, 1923, of 29 ewes, 10 lambs, and one wether hy dogs alleged to be owned by Mrs Tristram. During the hearing it was admitted that one of the oogs killed by plaintiff was owned by defendant, and it was proved that the other belonged to one Smith, who resided and kept Ins dog at Mrs Tristram’s house. The Magistrate held that, although it had been shown that one of the dogs belonged to the witness Smith, he thought Mrs Tristram was liable for the damage done by the dog as she was the occupier of the premises where it was usuullv permitted to remain. Plaintiff had proved that (ho dogs were seen worrying his sheep, ami ■were shot by him the next morning. “f think.” said the magistrate, ‘-{he facts point to the whole of the damage being done by the dogs which plaintiff shot, and tor that damage Mrs Tristram must he neld liable.” Judgment for £B4 was accordingly entered against (he defendant. Tristram and also against the separate estate of Mrs Tristram.