Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

MAGISTERIAL

MONDAY, OCTOBER 25. (Before Mr AV. A. Barton, S.M.) ’ / A DRAINAGE DISPUTE. lan Simson Simson, land agent, was prosecuted by It. D. B. Robinson, on behalf of the Borough Council, for an alleged breach of Section 71 of the Public Health Act of 1908. Mr T. A. Coleman appeared for the informant and Mr L. T. Burnarcr defended. The defendant was charged with, ou October Ist, having suffered the . contents of a drain to escape, being deemed thereby to have created a nuisance. Mr Coleman said that the complaint was in respect of a dwelling house at The Point, Whirtaupbko, on the riverside. The drain discharged at high water mark, with the result that when the tide was low the contents flowed out on the mud of the river Led. There was a trap by which the escape of the contents could be regulated, and Mr Simson had stated that. this was only opened when the tide was high. This, however, said counsel, did not alter the legal contention that by suffering the contents to escape the defendant "had created a nuisance. R. D. B. Robinson, Town. Clerk of Gisborne, said that on the Ist instant he visited Mr Simson’s house and inspected the drainage arrangements. The trap referred to consisted of a board at the end of an earthenware pipe, and was not'sufficient to stop all leakage. The defendant, wlio was present, told the witness that lie liberated the water at high tide. The witness raised the trap and let the contents escape. There was a channel worn down •the mud flat from the drain nearly tc; low water mark. The drain appeared to be used for carrying off kitchen water.

John Rogerson Little, Borough Inspector, who visited the place with the previous witness, said that in his opinion, the trap that''existed at the drain outlet was not water-tight and could not be made watertight. From the outlet of the drain there was a channel on the mud flat down to low water mark. Br Mr Burnard: The channel looked as though it had originally been dug out with a soade. Charles Henry Ferris, Assistant Sanitary Inspector, gave evidence to the effect that the trap was loosely fitted. He saw signs of soakage near the woodwork of the trap. For the defence Mtoßurnard argued that there was no evidence of a breach of the Act. Not one of the witnesses could say that they had seen anything escaping from the dram, yet the defendant was charged with an offence alleged to have been committed on a specific date. Counsel further contended that the waste water pipe was not a drain within the meaning of the Act. A drain as defined m the Act was a passage communicating with a sewer or receptacle for draiange, arid this outlet was into a natural watercourse. Agin there was no nuisance or evidence of a nuisance being created. The defendant gave evidence to the effect that at one time he allowed the drainage to run out between high and low tide. Since, however, the Council gave instructions last June that all drains were to be taken to low-water mark, lie had had a trap constructed whereby the contents were contained until the water was high. There was rubber on the trap which fitted tightly .into grooves. By Air Coleman : The pipes wore regularly emptied. Sometimes this was done twice a day. James Greig, architect, said that lie saw tlio defendant's outlet pipes, and the trap, though rather primitive, seemed effective He should say it was reasonably water tight. His AVorship said that lie thought the Section of the Act under which the prosecution was brought did not apply to the present case. If, however* tl» defendant was creating a nuisance he could be reached under another section., The information would he dismissedf with £1 Is counsel’s costs, and 10s witnesses’ expenses. OLD AGE PENSIONS. The following old age pensions were granted by Air Barton: —Esther Stevens £26 (renewal); Janet Canon, £l9; John Shaw, £26 (renewal); Isabelle Thompson, £26 (renewal); John Joseph Murphy, £26 (renewal); Flora McPhee, £26 - Hemamia Ngarangikataea, £lB (renewal); Hoani Ngapuhi, £lB (renewal).

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GIST19091026.2.5

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 2642, 26 October 1909, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
693

MAGISTERIAL Gisborne Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 2642, 26 October 1909, Page 2

MAGISTERIAL Gisborne Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 2642, 26 October 1909, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert