SHEEPBREEDER’S CLAIM

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 19915, 18 April 1939, Page 7

SHEEPBREEDER’S CLAIM

DIP-MAKERS SUED

DEATH 111-' STlil) STOCK

(Per Press Association.)

CHRISTCHURCH, this day.

Before Mr. Justice Northcroft and a special jury, a claim was brought in the Supreme Court to-day by Alan Grant, Waimate, sheepfarmer, for £IB2O in a special and general damages claim against Cooper, MacDougall and Robertson, Limited, Manchester, sheep-dip manufacturers, for alleged injuries to his iiock following the use of the defendant’s dip. The cause of the action, according to Mr. W. J. Sim, for the plaintiff, was that Grant dipped his stud sheep in dip manufactured by the defendants according to the makers’ directions and some of his sheep were killed. Before coming to New Zealand in 1913, said Mr. Sim, the plaintiff had three times won the premier award for sheep breeders in Scotland and had in South Canterbury built up a famous stud. The dip of which Grant purchased two five-gallon drums was advertised as being especially suited for dipping* sheep for show or sale, as it was claimed to give “bloom” . the fleeces. The dipping was done in perfect weather and Grant had followed the manufacturers’ directions, added Mr. Sim. The sequel was catastrophic, 37 sheep dying, including 16 stud rams, and 156 sheep were affected. The first to be dipped was a Romney stud ram for which Grant had paid 100 guineas and this was. dead by 7 a.rn. next day. A significant fact was that it was the first animals dipped that died, these being unfortunately valuable stud rams. The animals subsequently dipped suffered, but survived. Expert evidence 'would be called to show that the sheep died from absorption through the skin of phenol and tar acids contained in the dip. Evidence would be called also that the first» sheep put into the dip absorbed some of the poisons. The hearing is proceeding.