RESIDENT MAGISTRATE S COURT. THIS DAY.

Taranaki Herald, Volume XLIII, Issue 9922, 6 February 1894, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE 'S COURT. THIS DAY.

Tuesday, January 6. — Before W. Stuart,

Esq., R.M.

Judgment fob Plaintiff. — J. Veale junr. v. M. Maher. Claim £2 Is. Mr Standish for the plaintiff ; defendant did not appear. Plaintiff gave evidence. Judgment for plaintiff with costs, Taking Evidence. — Bowerman Bros. v. W. H. Scott. Mr Samuel, for the defendant, said that this was one of the famous Picturesque Atlas cases. The summons had been issued in Wellington, the object of issuing them at a distance being evidently to prevent investigation of the cases in the locality where the orders were given. It was decided to •take the defendant's evidence in chambers before the Clerk of the Court in order to save time, and then hava the evidence sworn afterwards.

Bull v. Bullock. — M. Muller v. W. Jones. Claim for damages for injury done to a bullock, by a bull Mr Govett for plaintiff, and Mr Weston for defendant. — Mr Govett opened, and called Matilda Muller, wife of Charles Muller, farmer at Omata, who said that she owned the injured bullock. On Jan. 8, one of their bullocks was brought from the paddock suffering from wounds on rump and flank, blood flowing from one,and oilfromthe otherwound. Thebullockhad been gored by a bull. Asked defendant to look at the bullock, but got no satisfaction from Jones, who said to her husband, "d your bullocks and wire." Fed the bullock on oaten hay, and poured water or. ihe wounds. If one of a pair of bullocks got injured the other one had to lie idle. She had to engage other people to do the work that the bullocks should have done. The defendant used to let his bull run about, but had it tied up since this affair. The bull had been in their paddock before. The bull came in and fought their bull one night, and she sent her son over to t«ll Jones. — By Mr Weston : — Her husband bought the bullocks. She was afraid that her husband would sell the bullocks, and eventually he said that he would present the bullocks to her and he did so. She had nothing in writing to show this, only her husband's word. They were not in difficnlties, for they owed no one. She owned a horse she drove beside the bullocks, but nothing else on the farm. Jones offered to lend them a bullock, but it would not work with their. Jones proved very unreasonable when spoken to. They had no offer of day work from Road Board since January 8. Since injury to the bullock they had to carry then 1 firewood. She had paid 10s to Mr Mace for use of dray for a day. She did not think the bullock was permanently injured. He could do light work, but was still a trifle stiff. — A. H. Muller, son of last witness, stated that on January Bth last Jones' bull got into their paddock and he, assisted by Jones' stepson, turned him out. Witness also gave evidence as to the injury to the bullock. [Mr Weston said he would admit that tho bull was there and did the damage, and the only question was, therefore, the amount of damage done. — John Mace also gave evidence. — Chas Evans was called, but did not give evidence. — For the defence William Jones gave evidence that when the bullock was injured ho offered to lend the plaintiff a bullock and cart. — Alfred William Jone^, his stepson, gave evidence that the damage to the bullock was not of a serious nature. — His Worship in giving judgment did not think that £5 damages had been sustained, and gave judgment for plaintiff for £1, with costs £2 13s.