A RANGER’S DUTY.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVIII, Issue 2737, 16 February 1910, Page 7

A RANGER’S DUTY.

POLICE COURT PROCEEDINGS

At, the. Police Court yesterday morning before Mr. \V. A. /Barton, Sv iVI., William Charles Campbell ranger in the Whataupoko riding for the Cook County Council, represented by Mr. G. Stock, proceeded against J. O’Dowd, (Mr Blair) for rescuing a horse that had been impounded, and interfering with four other horses.

John Warren, clerk of the County Council, produced the Council’s minute book of the 21st May, 1909, with the appointment of Campbell as ranger to the Council in the Whataupoko riding. Craig’s Road, where the ranger "cook the horses in question, was in the riding. To. Mr. Blair: "Witness had _ never had complaints as to complainant’s work, but complainant had t<jld him about the. difficulty ho had in performing his duty. Wm. Charles Campbell, ranger for the Cook County Council, for the Whataupoko riding, gave evidence that about 5.30 a.m. on Friday last, ho was in Craig’s Road, and saw five horses with nobody in charge. He was going to catch and hobble- them to take them to the pound. Defendant then came up and said: “You won’t take that horse,” referring to a roan horse. Witness knew the. horse was defendant’s because lie had impounded it. before, and defendant had naid the fees. Defendant then started throwing stones at the horses. "Witness said he would take them, and defendant answered that lie had been looking after them. Witness then started to drive the horses, when defendant said: “I’ll do for you, you b—, one of those, dark nights.” Defendant" then follov.ed witness,, and when they came to do Lautour Road defendant started throwing stones at the horses, and in answer to a question, said he was going to take the horses, biit refused to pay witness driving fees. The horses were driven away, as the result of the xielting. Defendant drove his own horse into his own place. Witness then had to follow the other horses. In the first place defendant was following witness, ns lie wont down to the horses. He was then over fifty yards from witness. Defendant was not in Craig’s road, and was not in charge of the horses. Jas. O’Dowd, defendant, deposed that on Friday last he got up between 4 a.m. and 5 a.m. His horse was standing in the paddock, near the gate. Witness saw ho wanted a drink, so let him out, and the horse went to a trough about four chains front the house. Witness went out alongside the ihor.se. When the horse had had a drink he galloped up Craig’s Road, amongst some other horses. Witness could see him all the time, and at once went after him. He; was never more than three or four yards from the horse, which stolined every now and then to nibble. Witness got to the horses about a second before complainant. Complainant said: “I’ve got yon now. You’ll have to give me a shilling.” Witness said he had been looking after the horse all the time, and had got there first. Witness always paid when the horse was properly caught. After witness refused to pay on this occasion, complainant said he. would make it hot for him. They both went- down the road with the horses, and when opposite ■witness’ place his horse turned into the- paddock, the. gate of which, was open. "Witness did not tlirow r stones or interfere noth the other horses.

To His Worship: Never threw a stone. This Aims a pure invention of complainant’s. Robert BroAvn, painter, gave evidenc* that lie saAV defendant put the. horse in the paddock, and between 5 a.m. and G a.ni., on Friday, ho again saw defendant who told him that complainant had tried to impound the horse. His Worship said he tvas satisfied that the horses /vere at large in Craig’s Road, and that defendant did interfere and threw stones at- the other horses, as well as rescue his own.

In each case a fine of 10s Avith £1 Ss costs Avas imposed.