POLICE COURT, HAMILTON.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXIV, Issue 2760, 22 March 1890, Page 2

POLICE COURT, HAMILTON.

♦ jYesteuday.—(Before Messrs Steele and Knox, J.Ps.) ,T. Hicks, J. C. Rutherford, W. J. Giuiibmo, Walter Coop, aii'l Abraham Wilcock were charged with having sheep infected with lice exposed for sale in various saleyards.—All pleaded guilty and were fined the minimum penalty of £1, with costs 7s. Albert Bruce Suttor was charged with having sheep iufected with lies exposed for sale in Mr McNicol's yards on February 27th. —Mr Hay appeared for the defendant and stated that Mr Suttor had urgent business in Auckland and was unable to appear. The sheep were unaffected when they left his place, but on being inspected at Ohaupo lice were found on them. He asked the Bench not to record a conviction against defendant, as he had taken every precaution to avoid infection. Mr Bayly, an expert, had inspected the flock prior to their being sent to Ohaupo, but not all the sheep were examined, and the one in question on which the lice were found looked of so healthy appearance that he was suie there could be no lice on it.—Pleaded not guilty.—Henry Oldham stated that he inspected John McNicol's yards on February the 27th, assisted by Mr Sub-inspector Hargreave, and they found lice on tsvo ot Mr Suttor's sheep, and lie would press a conviction Thesheep could not have got the lice on them in the yard, as he had examined them immediately after their arrival. Mr Hay stated that the plaintiff had no case as he had not proved that he was a sheep inspector, northat the place was within a. sheep district. He called B. P. Bayly, who deposed that he had some experience in sheep being an exGovernment sheep inspector. He was at Mr Suttor's on business a few days before the sheep were sent to the sale, and had been requested by Mr Suttor to examine the ewes, some four hundred he did so, and found these free from lice, some of these boing in low condition he would have expected if lice were prevalent in the flock to have seen them there. Did not examine the rams as they were in full condition, and had not the slightest appearance of being lousy. He was surprised when Mr Oldham had told him at the yards that the sheep were infected, but on examining the sheep in question he Baw two or three lice on it near the point of the brisket. By Mr Oldham : The lice were not in numbers, but very few indeed, and there was no outward indication that the sheep was infected. Mr Hay claimed that there could be no conviction, as plaintiff had failed in the technical points. Mr Oldham said that if inspected sheep were found in a yard exposed for sale a conviction must be recorded. The Bench upheld Mr Hay's objections and the case. Mr Oldham gave notice that he would appeal. Undefended Oases.—Judgment was given for the plaintiffs with costs in the following undefended cases: —Hamilton Borough Council v. G. N. Brassey, claim £1 (is; same v. T, M. Yates, claim £112s ; samev, F. Booth, £1 12s Gd ;: same y, W. Wheelan, claim £1 14s Gd. J. McNicol v. A. Lamb.—Olaim £17 7s Gd.