S.M. Court.

Opunake Times, Volume II, Issue 96, 4 June 1895, Page 2

S.M. Court.

Friday, May 81st, 1895. (Before Mr H. W. Brabant, S.M., and Messrs A. Morrison and G. W. Gane, J.B.’s.) CIVIL CASES. Espagne v. A. H. Moore.—This was a case for the recovery of certain do'cuments which wore in the possession ol the defendant. Plaintiff nonsuited with costs, 20s. W. Harvey v. Pelham.—Claim for possession of tenement and rent, £2 4s. Claim amended by consent to £4 Bs. Mr Bailey for plaintiff, and Mr Weston for defendant. Judgment by consent. Possession of premises to be given on 3rd June, 1895. Winihora v. M. Dillon.—Claim, £lB 17s, wages. Mr Bailey for plaintiff, and Mr Weston for defendant. Judgment for plaintiff for £lO 3s Bd, and costs, £3 14s 6d. W. Harvey v. Pelham.—Claim £5, for damages. Mr Bailey for plaintiff, and Mr Weston for defundant. Judgment reserved. CUTTING A WIRE FENCE. Tamakaha v. D. C. Simson.—This was a charge against defendant of wilfully cutting a wire fence erected by plaintiff at Taungatara, between plaintiff’s and defendant’s property. Mr Bailey for plaintiff, and Mr Shailer Weston for defendant. Tamakaha and Henari Wiremu swore that defendant’s cattle were continually running on their property at Taungatara, and in order to prevent their doing so they erected a five-wire fence along the side of the river; that the day after they erected the fence D. 0. Sitnson came in the morning and cut the wires through with an axe. D. C. Simson swore that he did not cut the fence, but that it was his brother who had done so. T. Simson swore that on the day in question he and Baldick were returning from the bush farm when they found two cows belonging to D, C. Simson on the Maori run, and they started them home. When the cows got near the fence one cow jostled the other into the fence, where it got entangled, and he took a slash-hook from Baldick and cut the fence to free the cow. J. Baldick corroborated this evidence, except that he stated the cow had apparently attempted to jump the fence, as she was swinging on the top wire. Constable Twomey gave evidence of the information having been given, and his having gone and inspected the fence, which he found had been cut through with a sharp instrument. In giving judgment the S.M. said it was quite evident that perjury had been committed, but the Bench was not sufficiently certain on which side it had been committed to say so. The charge would therefore be dismissed, and if fresh evidence were forthcoming it could be brought on again. The defendant should repair the fence, however, whether his story were right or wrong. trespassing. Police v. Harrison and J. Colmer.— The defendants were charged with trespassing, in pursuit of game without a license, and they pleaded not guilty. J. Mitchell gave evidence as to their being on his place on the 24th May, and his having heard several shots fired. Constable Twomey gave evidence that he met them coming out of Mitchell’s property. They each had a gun, and were followed by two sporting dogs. H. Harrison said they had gone up the Kahui Road in pursuit of native game, but not meeting with any luck decided on trying the Ngariki Road, and crossed Mitchell’s property to get there. The Bench considered the case proved, and fined them 20s each and 19s costs. CLAIM. D. C. Simson v. Tamakaha.—Claim £2B, for seven head of cattle, alleged to be lost through defendant’s negligence, and costs for two days spent in looking for them. Mr Shailer Weston for plaintiff, and Mr Bailey for defendant. The plaintifl alleged that the defendant drove four cows and five heifers off the Maori run, stating that he intended driving them to the Opunake pound. T. C. Simson (plaintiff’s brother) and J. Baldick met the Maori driving the stock on the run, and demanded possession, which was refused. The defendant drove them on to the road but did not put them in pound, and only two heifers out of the nine head had since been found. He therefore claimed the value of them. T. C. Simson corroborated this statement.

J. Baldick also corroborated the evidence of both the previous witnesses.

Defendant and his brother stated that they had three times driven stock belonging to Simson from off the Maori run, and had driven them across the Tauugatara River on to Simson’s land. On no occasion had they threatened to pound, and on none of the occasions when they were driving stock had they met either Simson or Baldick.

Mr Bailey quoted authorities to show that, if cattle were trespassing the owner of the property was quite justified in driving them off his premises. The Bench held that the evidence was very contradictory, and although Mr Weston had pointed out the unreliability of the Maori evidence, he must say that at times he found European evidence also extremely unreliable.

Plaintiff elected to accept judgment for defendant without costs instead of a non-suit with costs.