The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1870-11-08 00:00:00

WAREHAM COUNTY COURT.

This must was held on Monday. There was OW
adjourned twee, 87 new pleinta, sad 3 judgment
summonses. The Register (Freeland ?Miter, aq.),
took the undisputed oases at ten o'clock. Two bears
later the judge (T. K P. Lefroy, Esq., arrived awl
!word the following cues:—

C. J. Green v. J. Porsier. —This wae a claim of else
guineas, and the ease oinked considerable interim is
the town. The action was brought by a printer, Ida
has lately published a news-sheet, against a well•kainrs
draper in the town. Mr. Dickenson, of Poole, appeared
for the defendant.

The plaintiff began his case with a florid speech. 1111.
ing that had he known that Mr. Poynter -Si goiag IS
have the advantage of the eloquence of a learned
advocate, he also might have engaged oonnsel to plied
his cause. This and more was read from shook who
Mr. Dickenson interrupted, asking if be was goiag Is
make • speech and give evidence too?
The judge thereupon told him they did not want s
speech.
. .

'Plaintiff then stated that his claim was for a
quarter's advertising.
Mr. Dickenson inquired if he hail been swore.
Defendant said no, and he did not want to be :del
was not his business: the offieers of the court should
see to that. (This bit of impudence did not provoke
any laughter.) He was then sworn, and to meal
further see speeches, his Honour asked pisildif
questions to Glint the proof he required.
Plaintiff etated that be saw defendant at Weehew
police court on July 11, and asked him if be shoekt
continue inserting big advertinecoeut for the ease*
quarter, and he answered " YOB, certainly." Bs
entered the order in his pocket-book. Before the Judge
had concluded plaintiff began to discuss the question
with his Honour, but was sharply reproved 41 MI.
Lefroy and told not to attempt to arra with him.
Next it wae found that plaintiff was reading from •
book, and the judge ordered him to shut it up. "Oh,
said plaintiff, very meekly. "I was merely &A% 104
• plain statement of the case. Proceeding with the
evidence, plaintiff said the price charged was Is. fid. pm
huh per weak. Q. - Were the terms mentioned? L.
—ln the first instance. Q.—Hu he Said 00,021144,!
A.—Yes, for the firet quarter. Ifg,—Be told you
continue the &dyes tisensent ? and that I.'
swear. Q.—Have you asked him for the money? A.--
He refused to pay before the quarter beesme_dee,
because • rival tradesmen's advertisement was pkeed
under his. Q.—Did he tell you Oct to advertise ow
longer on account of it' On the 21st July be saki he
must decline having it inserted any acre, bit I Sag
him I should keep him to his word.
Plaintiff's letter of the 2lst July was heeded le the
Judge, and his Honour remarked that defendant disbud
the contract.

Plaintiff began vociferating. , and hi. 'lemur "II" es
hlm to conduct himself properly, and like a eceni".. miensert%h
plaintiff.ewent to h
.lie
tstate.
callefentbda.nt alloy
tid Lpathe
arct week'.
ogiesd far
the rival's advertisement being put under hi& B.
accepted my apology, and told me to go oo with
But after further consideration it mem/ he wished to
decline, but I have kept him to Isis worth
On Mr. Dickenson rising to cress-examine plaintiff,
Yr. Green seked him. Is you n&IDO on tlie roll of the
Registrar of this court?
Mr Dickens= would mot answer.
Thu Judge said plaintiff had better ink him (11.
Dickenson) to prove his admission as an attorney.
Mr. Filliter maid Mr. Dickeoson's name was on tis
roll of the court.
Mr. Diclaenson then asked plaintiff when defeadaat
ffrst began to advertise with him.
Plaintiff fenoed with the question, and his Resole
asked him to be good enough to answer straight'
faiwardly. Don't imagine, said he, you are eshitetilf
*lea •rness.
Again, in answer to Mr. Diokenson, plaintiff said the
adverthertiont was cowmen on April 16, and was*
tho tumor, nothing was said about per week.
Flow Caine you to mention so much per inch per walk. A.—That is the usual way 1 Q.—Are you prepared $0
say the contract was by the quarter and not by the
week? A.—lt was by the quarter. Q.—Was tae
•dvertisement to be a =clingier aim? A.- YON tel
inches, if I could spare that spa= Q.—Was the cow
tract to be varied? mine weeks ten inches, and others
less? A.—l only *barged him for the sperm I oeeepiwl-
Q.—Did you tell hi,,, you could not auartantee him ten
Inches? A.—No. Q—l think yes did depart from it
A.—l admit that. Q.—Now tell me careful, what
took place at the interview of the llth July? A.—WI
net at the Guildhall, and I said, Kr. Portable. Ten
advertimment is ended for the present quarter, seal
continue it for the neat? and he said "Oertaialy. Gress.' That I thought suffieisint from a respectable
tradesman.

111 v. Dieiceason : No doubt if Kr. Poyutor had said is
It would haws been Ittaleillni. I talieve you wro.',"
latter to Mr. Poynter On October 13? A.—Y.. id
answer to his own. It was produced, and Kr. Disk/sem
read from it. " You dist.notly gave is. an order to Wl'
tinue your advertisement for the pita quarter." A.—
Tbat was • mistake : I meant the preeent quarter. 0.
July 161 called on Kr. Poynter to apologise, be asseP"
my sPology. Lod told is. it wag all ragas, a. wa. Val
• Irritant" when I brat saw him. I told him I Vag
very sorry, and should not mind giving him WI
advertiament that week Q.---Did you not ear youwould not charge him for. the advertteentent that week
If be would continue, when he replied he woeld not
advertise with you again? A.—Re said be should Doi
advertise again, but I told his I should keep We to
los order.
Plaintiff produeed sesend siestas-road blocks whish
be said he bad to go to the espoisee Otter delleadneh
lir' Dick•noon aso eliiiited that whoa *haat beim
li. had • large number of advertises's* but sew
im•roti7 any, bet obiletiff denied basins aUeradiens
with other advertiser% Wash be Modelled a USW
misunderstanding.
The judo said that 41 delhadant osetresied te her.
tea hone' of spese, ekes
.plaletall eels paws Ma GO.
iimbes, he had • ported mat to sad the esateess • sad
he illustrated the joshes of that deskies by smygll
you ordered • cost at • taller, sad, he, not
ha
eawagh sloth, seat in base without tall", flee
you 4lnk of him ? peollater).
',Wow used that be wok 41+,4 doloallue Ow
the wes be o ample&

The halle NM it was an thin absurdity to oppose
shis plaintiff mid cut and dole an advertisement as
bajt rkennon said he should most positively deny
do there was say imetracit, sad plaintiff's own lotter.
Wilma did see amides it neeemeary to go
fobs into the me, but he said it would perhaps be
pore totiotosiooy to plithiM' V he were called,
mi. Dianna said he wished to do that. and kr.
rthe mem sad anted that on April 12 plaintiff
st his shop sad asked for his patronage, the
nod thigh was he pee him an advertisement which
le loopy 10 Mess in double colamn and be
Awned IL to. pot week. He continued that one
ofitilD. OD July 11 he es • plaintiff at the magistrates
amid asked kits to send in his bill.
judge: Did he say saything thout coolanning
Ike idemrliment
MOM: Not a word, lle sent for the amount
Do li.lEs. eod lb, and got it on the 2011—
E 8 il& Oa the ellith he saw pleintiff, who
ems to sap sommething shoat another tradcaman's
winatimentent being planed under his: the only reply
be (deielbilMlS) DV, him was that he would hare nothing
mere to de with hi. (Onea's) paper. On the 23ed he
pleinife amenant, amid then told him that he
miss* entlersecen that he should not bare hi. wirer-
, timmemst ironed apts. Plaintiff said be shoeld ma-
tins it, end he imild him if he did be thould en pay a
lulfoney fee It. Not a word was said almet • entralt.
The Judie Why did you dianthus law "1"1141-
sant S—A.: He had eversharged me and I beard be
had dome the ems to otherreope I paid bin ths balms
of see metiata to have Donna ameto d° with him'
Dromansinised : At the Lie eitstlanot MN" w"
no nintha of a quarter.
Hine Pyyster end am andeleal nand Edward Hallam
emeberand Yr. Perini that at ea interview on the
234 plaistiff was mid not to Mart ne advertisement,
and reminded that be had Wm so told before.
The Judge said be weld some to no other omission
them that plaintiff bad not made out a coatrase for
the led quarter, sad titers men he a verdict for the
defendamt.
Mr. Dishiness asked for costs.
Plataliff pleaded that the loss of his skim the
soon& let defendant hied had the benefit of the
advertisement&
Dr. Dinneen taid so, me the 05510117, Plaintiff had
hew seinething sp,t.g geode, whisk night injure
dnesist UM mann.
Hie Hooey rid plaintiff had determined to try to
Az defeatism. with se order after putting In the *deer.
tiserseet on speculation, and he meat take the won
geniese—enie mast follow in the ordinary worse.
Plaistiff : If I am sot sanded may I take a case
Ths Jedgia, eerily: Take your own sourer.
?nem Gans r. C. J. ()rm.—Claim 15e. for •
sheep driven over by defendant on coding from Wood.
bury Hill fair, depa. Si. A boy named Roberta said
he was driving 120 sheep along the road, when Green
came sioug la a two-wheel at a trot. He called out
•• Take mare," and "Out of the reed,' end witness tried
to get the sheep on of the way. In doing Ibis defen-
dant Dearly drove over him, and did drive over a
sheep, which then fell den and meld not walk any
more. Mastiff alio said defendant drove over on of
the ant flook—lanter mime day.—De.
tenant's Ws the that he wee only walking the horse
be was Idyls& —The jingo
_raid he did not me how the
steep weld have Imes kind if that were the ease, and
ore judgment for the as. claimed and expenses.
Li OLD DENT.

Mr. Weston applied for • judgment 'ominous to be
granted to the widow of Kr. Edward Shepherd, of
Borten, spinet James Harris, of Wool, for £22 12a. 6d.
So loser ago as 1864 defendant was ordered to be oom-
mitred for 21 days for nos-peusent of an order granted
to Ms. Shepherd. That was sever executed, sod now
It war aught to make the widow plaintiff.-11r. Atkin-
son opposed, on Mie ground of the long time that had
elapsed and defeedast's poverty.7Mr.Weston examined
delemiaat to show that he bad a horse, sows, and
sheep, but It seemed thee* bad gees to his "brother.
in.law."—Hia Hollow suggested an arrangement. It
seemed that 111 offer of half the claim was made a long
time ago, and Mr. Wastes sow said no reasonable offer
would be Taus& La the menthe* his Honour
granted the applisation.
Owes 7..ater v. Hoary Ilabir.—asim 7s. 64. for
damage done to plaintiff's quartar.aer• of oats by
defendant's sow, getting amongst them. Judgment
for plaiatiff. The puttee live at Mudge.
Bab" v. risier.—PLiatiff then claimed Ga. 3d. for
provisions, ha. Defendant said it was settled in an
amount brought to the County Court last February,
and his Hoarier after !squiring into the matter ea:-
eluded such was the Gus, and gave judgment for
defendant.
Charier 0•141, labourer v. RicAard WAik, yeoman, of
East Stoke. Mr. Loewy for defendant. Plaintiff stained
for the prodese 0120 lag of potato ground, Early in
the year he weal to work for deferidant, by the piece
mainly, and was allowed potato ground like the yearly
labourer& In June he had ajob as which be soaid
only oars 31a, is In weeks, sad when he 'complained to
Mr. White he (defeedant) said, "I hare got nothing
more for you to do at pressed." Upon that he left and
rot employment at a neighbouring farm, Defendant
refused to let him dig the potatoes. The seed cant 9s.
Croes-earuninsd : He had been gaits ready to work for
Mr. White all the summer if be had wanted him —lt
seemed a man gassed Banes, who had been working
with Cobb left at the VMS time, but a law days after
Mr. White seat for hies, and he returned ; Cobb In
never seat for—Mr. Lacey urged that the custom. was
to allows labourer who left before core harvest for seed
sad I•boar, and 12s. had been paid into wart for the
purpose. His Humor said that as Mr. White allowed
plaintiff to leave, it was as much his business to send
for him main as for plaintiff to return. It was not the
care of • man who had obstinately street work. At the
judge's suggestion, *tariff obtained 3. sod oosta by
consent.

"aorz To Taz DOGS."

Mows Hibbs, Winfrith, v. Maria Morris. Wool.
Tbis was ielabn of £3 l. balance for horse hire. It
NMI defendant purchased a horse of plaintiff for £4,
'Lich be was to pay in a month by Li. week or elm
give up the horse and be liable for Lie week for the
hire. The purchme money wen not paid, plaintiff
seised the bores, and sued for the biro. It seems the
horse had to be killed. Defendant said plaintiff worked
and starved lb. horse. It had two spavined hooks, and
got into tbe mire, hal ended by " going to the dop"
- •111 r. Ratcliffe's brienda—Ordersd to pay El forthwith
and the balsam in a month.

Mandell Randell was a grosery bill of £1 Ilk lid.
Defendant rid be oely owed 4e. 6d., and broeght a roll
of papers for hie Homier to we that was so. The jodp
ermined the bills and plaintiff's books, and found the
money due. upon which he ordered payment by 10s. •
month. Defendant said he should not pey. The judge
told him if he did not he would sommit him for 40
days, GO he was to make his arrangements sooordingly•
-Defendant: Very well.
Sturdy, of ?molehill, v. Skimmer, of Wareham.—
This was • claim of 13e, log lose by the default of the
keyword. 011 the 7th /ingest reek belonging to Yr.
Jesty was found in a Irld of kg. Sturdy's, They were
Impounded, bat began "hooking* one smother, and the
heyesard at the einerden of • third party turned the
brats into a ree&w. Neat morning the owner's eon
had drives them oway.—Jodgment for plaintiff, for
whom Kr. Lary appeared.
• IMELDOOII, DISTIM : JUST CAB&

Joke Angel Dais" of Winfrith, v. Cherie. Stuff, of
the same pariah.

Yr. M. C. Winton for plaintiff. and Mr. 0, Symonds
for defendant. The jury were—Mr. J. Id. Rowe, Mr.
R. Dory, Mr. W. 11. Hawkins, Mr. J. Gillingham, sad
Mr. T. A. Oaltlei.
The pleintiff Maimed £lO duress in sonnquenes of
defendant having on the 27th June last i.laed and
takes from sad ant of the rid defendant's 6eld sailed
" COW Lark" 26 lamhs. the property of plaintiff, sad
detained the. la the sonmen pound el Winfrith,
until the raw were teplevied sad redelivered to him
under a carnet from the Registry of the Cacoty
Court.

Hz. Sasso& admitted that the lambs were plain.
tiro property, and that his client seisad them. This
being so he had to jaslify the taking, and therefore
opened the tan. He said that both jparties oesultiod
adjoining farms ender Mr. Weld, Kr. Scutt entering
_at
Loclr MK daYi as vosasser to Mr. Reeking, and Mr.
Duna had been a lomat for many years. Gomplainta
of trespassing area, end there was mutual forbearance
to a certain point, hat lest JUDII, Mr. Scutt having a
Pim of Swede amiss 1.3•12 and growing, in a Sold
adjoining oat of Kr. Damen'', on the evening of the 27th
about 90 of plaintiff's sheep were found trespassing utd
feeding on the 'ovum hernia, which before gave groat
promise. The sheep were impouoded. and 25 of them re-
mained there till the 29th when they were replevied by
Use plaintiff. The two fields ocionpad by the parties
were formaly one, but before the quitting by Yr.
Hopkins, of whose farm this field formed a part, It mu, divided by Mr. Bates, the steward of Mr. Weld. A
hook wee made through the middle and quick planted
litoti it by Hr. Death at Mr. Weld's express. Bat quick
did not eoutitute fosses Immediately- however, at
that tame, each wide w are laud- No dattit the
tioestisa would really tern on whose ditty it was to
valuate the (noes—whether or sot the duty was cart
Ipoe Mr. anutt not only to maintain that fence so as to
prevent his ewe stook trespassing, hut also sufficient to
prqty•ot his oeigithones stook from trespaming UPoll
b 6 (MH% lleett'ii) Iliad. In • awe recently tried in the
C°1417 °ftin of Wilt., whore epesifieially the same
question uses, llie jadge quoted from a lt.ok of oon• Idevahle authority the lan uhe read it, as follows :
" Whenever two person. have nijoini kik and no hale
or knee Waren thee test ear take 'rlgre that his own bears
do " tft."" "firstor's ukr Proprietor ha
anioinkl • right or title by n on'
oro,=iou to have the
boondwy ter bet one his del Zod that "albs .o:Ant
n
oroprirtor maintared and nerved at the ex such
i',-diooling proprietor. Every man is knind by law to take case
that bin be". tresPar upon the land id his ighbour.
Ile mkt Ine,......within Ur n, either by seploying eerme ta to
si.with seam a
keep then oilt el Ida owe land or hy eneloseelf
kod that the wane The
making of lance %Miele,' batmen hi, o. lands:Sibiu°,
hi. neighbour dem am raise my itJerence that tit Intended for the Moat of hie neighboo,
prevented his neighboun haft trent then/wenn ae well " hie
own ; for It it kr his own reek to prevent hh bmeletrons insular Wee his 'Webber% peowity...
The Judge maid there wee no doubt uto tbe law. If
It
were me duty el the plaintiff % keep the in
quesUon in melt, he did aet
.44. by ep,,,:nit,
his sheep , be wee liable.
Ir. ByentriVatdho *lotwolotoded that plaiatiff
would have DO eam Naiad the def...i.„ uele
could show Uwe wee a duty by pent or preariptiou
on the part ef the deleadant to mania% that few*
sot only against his own cattle bet against plaintirt
Is ISM Mr. Daman appBed to Mr. Bates to put us e
win foam on his (plalatire) side of the (leak sad pro-
tent it wawa sew sleek whist' plaintiff wished to put
in his lad. That wineisted of four wire.: hem
euffieieut fears assist 'ewe would pod ko•P_ off sheep;
so liter two ram wires were added seder Kr. Daan's
orders. flabwinneetly be should show that plaintiff's
rim improved the fames to prevent Mr. Damao'. sheep
1.,•010111g • dies ad sen
s be should nand that Mr
Lamas wee= te provost his sheep treaintadDl on
Us. defeedant, sad &mbar failed to do so that he was
liable for the damage they bad owed.
Mr. Whelan urged AM it was ter itelendset be imitify
tibias the sheep.
Mr. Symonds seed the trespass ealleed, and pialatiff
meet skew that it was defesdant'a duty to maiatain
%hy knew

/Aar allorasiss Ihe 'sip Mod spied Kr. WeAss;
Insisis pospolal pore es immeip,

if ter

Ref*

Plaintiff said he occupied Knithtem farm, and sowed
tardps in the field in qaestion (12 sues) on the 1%4 or
2rel of June, and they came up well. At the 114.110
time ho sewed some on similar land on the oppoeir.
side of the road. On the 27th Ju:ia he found about 90
sheep in his turnips; with asalemnee ho drove them to
the pound. Defendant's shepherd came up with • dog,
and tried te get the sheep away. It wan nearly half an
hour from the time he got the sheep to when he had
driven them out. The swedes were fit to horse hoe.
but after the sheep they could Inateei, be seen, lie
believed he bad lost half the Igor. and that they wood
have been wort', 1:8 a acre. On 28th June saw plaintiff,
Mr. Bates. and Mr. Band, and chortled £lO damage,
which plaintiff rails, to p.p.
In crosa-examinateet dtf,•ndaat admitted that the
IMMO had been bad for turnips, sod that that field had
had • little wireworm. Rooks had not destroyed many.
Thought driving sheep mom them would du them the
reverie of good. Nearest Mr. Damen'a they wets the
worst.
ii.-examined: Pigs carried some of the turnips away
—pigs from Mr. Damen'a
Mr. Weston: Were they Mr. Datneres?
Witness : No, the dairyman's
. . . . .

Robert Tracer' deposed thaa the plants could be seen
all njorig the drill lines, and promised well before the
sheep got in. After it the drills could not be discerned.
Mr. Daniel Symonds, of Aahton, said he had esperi•
ease in agriculturel valuations for 20 years. Went over
the field on the 30th June. On the eastern side there
was not • perah but what the sheep had been over, and
he oould namely &agent • plant or the stump of one.
The west side was not so seriously damaged, and in
spots be could trace the drill. The laud wee very loose,
and no doubt U sheep took hold of the planta,in • great
measure they woold some up entirely. Was there Jut
Saturday. On (oar scree there was about • third of •
crop; on soother third, half • orop ; artd the other was
not seriously damsged—the plants were wonderfully
recovered. He estimated the damage at £3O.
Hr. Symonds was about to ask the damage which had
arisen as rsoorrerniag the neat crop, but Mr. Weston
objected as being too remote, Lod His Honour thought
that had better be left.

____
Croarexaminee : There was not an avenge crop for
the season in that 1144. Thera was no particular (lg.
femme in tha soil.

--
lirreaunined Being light, the soil would be more
suited for turnips than anything else.
Defesdast offered no farther "widow as to damage,
and plaintiff prosseded to speak am to the ream
Mr. J. A. Damen said he had occupied his farm up-
wards of thirty years. Shortly after the death of the
late Mr. Wald there wait a re-valuation and re-letting
of arms. A dad of 21 wee held by defendant's prede-
asset (Mr. Hopkina) was divided, he had nibs wee of
it, and Mr. Hopkins retained the other It Mr. Bates
pat in peg. and his (plaintiff's) men made • single
Nink-2 clods and a turn-clod—and the ditch On
his (plaintiff's) side, and planted quick. at Mr.
Weld's expense. It wu not writhed up, on
either side, Mr. Bates saying he would not have it
done that year. Long before the beak was put up, Mr.
Bates said he should throw the fence to Hopkins's field,
and it was to be put up on Hopkins's laud; and was
, so put. In 1869 be told defendant that the field
wee let to his dairyman avd would be fed off, so be
must Insist on his putting up a proper fence.
Defendant said it was the landlord's duty to keep the
hoes for three years. and he would see Mr. Bates.
Shortly after he found Mr. Well's man putting upon a
wire fence on his aide of the hedge.
At this point the hearing was adjourned to Tomiday,
and it was agreed that the jury should be dissitarged.
On resuming on Tuesday. Mr. Symonds oomplained
that on the previous evening one of the jurors—Mr:
Rowe—dined in a room at the Red Lion Hotel, with
plaintiff, nig attorney, and v•luer (Mr. Randall), and he
objected to Mr. Rowe serving any further.
Mr. Weston said the room was public, and not a word
WWI said about the ow.

His Honour mid it ass an set of impropriety, but
unless Mr. Symonds could show the OWN wee discussed
be 'mild not say the juryman should not mese.
Mr. Symonds protested against the 0810 being tried by
a juryman who would set in that way, and suggested
they should praised with four.
Yu Weston did not object, and Mr. Rowe was released
tress further atteodsnes.
The examination of Mr. Dames was resumed: He
put up the fence in question at the request of Mr.
Bates. It bad been deemed one or two jeers by Mr.
Nett's !shearers. He had bein willing to refer this

diepele.
Crass-examined: The field was divided after own-
plaints by Mr. Hopkins of his (plaintiff's) stock trespass-
le& Before the wire flute was put up in May he
'polo to Mr. Bates several times about It. The steward
did not tell him It was the duty of the tenant on each
Bide to tenet the quick until it had grown to be sufficient,
or he should hare repudiated it He ordered the two
wires from Mr. Gilpin's, they were sent to Wool, he had
them fetched, and carried them to the field. In order-
ing them he might have said if Mr. Weld would not
pay for them he would. Hs believed the whole fence
was completed in a week. Plaintiff's letter ordering
the wire was produad dated July la. Hs then said of
coulee the six wires could not have been put up with
the rest in May. He had no authority from Mr. Weld
or Mr. Rates to order the wire in the landlord's name,
but he told Mr. Rates of it directly. After his sheep
were impounded he sent Mr. Randall to defendant to
offer to refer the question at to damage and the hedge
to arbitration, but Mr. Scutt would not, and demanded
£lO. On the 28th he, del/adept, Mr. Bates, and Mr.
Randall met at Wool. Mr. Bates said to me he was
sorry my sheep had got into Scull's field again. I said
the fence was bad—the wires web ° too far apart to keep
them back. Mr. Bates said he thought I ought to have
hurdled against the wire fence on ay ground. I said
then what was the use of my taking the land to
throw the lane. to me. He said that's a question
not to be decided now.

Mr. J. G. Hopkins, of Gallon, said be formerly
occupied the farm now held by Mr. Scutt. When
the field was divided, Mr. Bates told him that be
would have to keep up the fence : be didn't like the
arransement, and left the farm.

Crosa.extrained : Did not know what arranpment
was made with Yr. Scutt.

John Bishop, • labourer in Yr. Demon's employ, said
be used to work for Mr. Scutt, and while in that ser-
vice he weeded and Gleaned the thorns all through by
Mr. Betitt's orders.

Oreevezamined : Had been in Mr. Damen's service
two years, and had "shuffled" some earth from the
ilitah under the wires to keep the sheep from creeping
ander, and put in some clots between the posts and
hedge.
Plaintiff re•called, said that In 18611 he saw two men
named Angel and Fox, in Mr. Sou, employ, cleaning
the fence.

David King, Mr. Damen's foreman, said none of
plaintiff's men had done anything to the bank or thorns
since the fence was made, But he had aeon John
Bishop and others clean the fence.
In oroarezaminstion he admitted ordering Bishop to
611 up the holes under the wires.
Joel Cranston, dairyman, in 1868 saw 110010 men
leaning the thorns.
Evidenee was then given by plaintiff as to the damage
defendant's Swedes.

elimniltig

Kr. Damen said the drills could just be sem: before
nia sheep got in • they scuffled them about a bit, patio
a week the drills again appeared very plain, an/ the
plants looked up nearly as well as at first. The wenn
had been particularly bad for turnips; in that field the
soil varied greatly, and turnips always were patchy
there, as he hail seen when shooting over the land.
There seemed to be a very fair crop. It was impossible
to say what damage was done by the sheep Sheep
were sometimes driven over wheat land to make It
lighter; and he thought that in a dry season driving
lambs over turnips at the stage defendant's wale would
be beneficial.
Cross-examined : Had been President of the Winhith
Farmers' Club. Mr. Symonds: Taking your thirty
experience, may I take It as your opinion that
(ter 'beneficial to drive a Sock of lambs over turnips
dter they ate op in drill I—A. I have done It myself.
Richard Slade, plaintiff's shepherd, said the sheep
were in defendant's field about a quarter of an hour,
David King was surprised at the little damage stems
by the sheep.
Joel Cranston thought there was every good oroy
for the season.
Mr. Symonds asked if there was anything to go to
the jury.
The Jedge said there was the evidence of defendant's
men repairing.
Mr. Symonds called
Mr. Bates, steward to Mr. Weld, who said it was
against his wish and &drift that the case WS4 brought
here. The field was divided in the first place to make
two neighbours better friends—it WU no direct benefit
to Mr. Weld, and he was afraid there might be seine
reflection upon him for the way In which the division
warn made. He then detailed the making of the bank
and planting quick at Mr. Weld's expense. Sebes-
quently he added at Mr. Weld's expense posts and four
wires when Mr. Damen used tbe field for dairy pasture.
Two more wires had been added. He did not authorise
Mr. Damen to get them on Mr. Weld's account.
Believed he had paid for it, but he did so mad Ter.
Path, not noticing that the wire was charged which
Mr. Damen ordered. He bdieved he had asked Mr.
Smite to have the quick cleaned on more than one
0411WWOO, and had allowed him for it in the rent. One
,44144 was produced, showing an allowance of
its. 2d., for such cleaning. On 28th June he
met the parties to this nation at Wool. From time
to tiny) application had been made to him by both
parties as to the liability to repair the fent*, and he
invariably stated to the best of hie belief, that each had
to tenon on his own side for the protection of the ~uick,
till it bonnie • proper fence, to be handed over to one
or the other till then it remained under the landlord's
protection.
Cro.a.examined : Fie told Mr. Ihui.n the landlord
wee not to be put to the expense of writhing this fence,
and be did not contemplate putting up • wire fence,
but did that because Mr. Damen was at the ex puree of
laying it down to pasture.
The Judge said the evidence was very strong indeed
that the fence belonged to the landlord, and if he aft.
looted to keep it in proper repair it was plaintiff's buil.
nem to take steps for preventing his cattle from
trespassing, and he would have • remedy against the
landlord.

er-e-se-exeminetion continued: When he let the term
to Mr. Scutt he probably told him the fence would
ultimately be thrown to him ; bet it newer had been
throve to him. This fence wee altogether esoeptionei.
William Brine, in Mr. Damsn's serviee, spoke to
hewing orders to repair the fence.
Robert Roper, working in Mx. Weld's Weber-yard,
spoke to getting the wire for the two additional lines
been Mx. Demon's.
At tot the learned gentleman had addressed the jury,
his Houour summed up the cue.
::th fat ejarb. deinu
,alte.rmeont:erringwith
ro damtogetbeig.. ow
-
diet returned • o-
-4