Judicial.

Otago Witness, Issue 1419, 1 February 1879, Page 20

Judicial.

SUPREME COURT.

Friday, 24th January. (Before his Honor Mr Justice Williams and

a Special Jury.) J. A. R. MENZIES V. J. ANDERSON.

This was a claim of L2OOO damages for trespass, whereby plaintiff'd sheep stock were deteriorated in value.

The Attorney-General (Hon. R. Stout), with whom was Mr Denniston, appeared for the

plaintiff ; and Mr Haggitt, with whom was Mr Kettle, tor the defendant. The following were the issues :— 1. Was the depasturing license No, 88 issued to the plaintiff as) in the declaration alleged?— Yes. 2. Did the plaintiff, in pursuance thereof, enter into possession of Run 88 and continue in such possession till the termination of the said depasturing license ? — Yes. 3. Did the plaintiff elect to surrender the said depasturing license and to receive from the Waste Lands Board of the Province of Otago a lease, under the "Otago Waste Lands Act, 18C6," of the land held under the said depasturing license ; and was the lease set out in the declaration granted to the plaintiff in pursuance of such election as in the declaration alleged ?— Yes. 4. Did the plaintiff, in pursuance of the said deed of lease, and from the date thereof, continue in possession of the said Run 88 tiH the commencement of this action ? — Yes.

5. Did the Waste Lands Board of the Provincial District of Otago decide what was the proper eastern boundary of the said Run 88, and is the minute set out in the declaration the minute of such decision in the books of the said Board ?— They purported to decide. 6. Is the description and plan of said Run 88, set out in paragraph seven of the declaration, the description and plan of Run 88, as decided or interpreted by the said Waste Lands Board?— Yes. 7. Did the lands upon which the said alleged trespasses were committed form part of a pastoral run 161, of which before and at the time of the commission of the alleged trespasses the defendant was in actual possession as tenant to the Crown by virtue of the lease set out in the defendant's third plea?— No. 8. Is the portion of Run 161 upon which the said alleged trespasses were committed, the parcel of land which the said Waste Lands Board by its said decision and minute affected ? -No.

9. Is the defendant's said lease still in force and unaltered ?— Yes.

10. Does the parcel of laud claimed by the plaintiff as comprised within the boundaries defined by the said Waste Lands Board, form part of the land demised to the plaintiff in his deed of lease?— Yes.

11. Was the decision of the said Waste Lands Board, made and pronounced on the thirtieth day of January, 1878, so pronounced upon the application and at the request of the plaintiff, and against the will and protest of the defendant ? — The defendant was not bound ,by the decision of the Waste Lands Board. 11 A. Is the plaintiff's said lease still in force and unaltered ?— Yes.

12. (a) Was the boundary creek in the resolution of the said Waste Lands Board mentioned, for many years used as a boundary of the plaintiff's Run No. 88?— Yes. (b) Was the said creek the natural boundary of the said run I— Yes.

(c) Was the said creek the proper eastern boundary of the said run?— Yes. 13. Was the plaintiff in actual possession of the parcel of land affected by the said decision of the said Waste Lands Board at the time of the commission of the alleged trespasses thereon?— Yea.

11 Or was the defendant in possession of the said parcel of land before and at the time of the commission of the said grievances ?— No.

15. Did the defendant, on Beveral occasions between the Ist day of December, 1873, and the 15th day of April, 1878, break and enter upon the plaintiff's Run No. 88 (inclusive of the land affected by the said decision of the Waste Lands Board) and depasture the same with sheep ?-— Yes. 16. Or did the defendant, between the dates aforesaid, break and enter upon the plaintiff's said run, exclusive of the land affected by the said decision, and depasture the &ame with sheep ?— No. 17. Is the plaintiff entitled to any, and if any, what damages? — Yes ; L4OO.