DISTRICT COURT.

Inangahua Times, Volume II, 4 March 1881, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT.

♦ Tuesday, March 1, 1881. (Before His Honor Judge Broad.) Lynch v. Inangahua County Council. The Court resumed at 2 p.ra, Mr Lynch, the counsel for defendants, raised a point as to jurisdiction, as a title is involved, and be held that the mode of procedure is not regular ; and secondly, asked for a nonsuit, on the ground that what had been done by the Council was done by virtue of the powers hold under the Counties' and the Public Works Acts. Mr Guinness contended that the defendants have not attempted legally to exercise the statutory powers Tested in them. His Honor reserved the points. The counsel thereupon entered upon the defence, and called the following evidence :— Francisco de las Carreras : I reside in Reefton ; I was formerly Secretary and Road Overseer to the Road Board, and subsequently clerk to the County Council. It was part of my business to lay off roads in the district ; I was directed to lay off a road in 1876 to Rainy Creek, and did so through some land occupied by Norman M'Donald, but which is now held by the plaintiff. The road, which went through M'Donald's paddock, was very stony in parts near the fence, the rest consisted in clusters of lawyers ; I cleared tte road, and found that it passed over very poor ground. The road did not include any good land ; I only cleared 10 feft of the road— three or four chains consisted of heavy timber with better soil. The value of the ground would be almost nil. It is much like the ground outside this Court ; I obtained a tracing of the river bed, and I sent it to the Waste Lands Board, showing the track along it, as surveyed by the District Surveyor. Both mine and the suryeyors'plans were forwarded to Nelson. The plaintiff was aware that I wae marking off the road as Orerseer for the Board. The toad was necessary on nccount of the increased traffic, and was irft3e out of the grant in aid of roads.

No objections were made against tbis road ; it was publicly known. Cross-examined by Mr Guinness : The plaintiff lived about three or four chains from the ground now in question. The ground wns improving in quality as the timber was neared ; I have contracted for falling and burning, and got 20s per chain. The road I laid off was one chain in width, but it was only cieareJ for 10 feet. About three years ago I gaye up charge over the road. Grass will grow in places among boulders. William Gardner : lam an engineer residing in Reefton, and was formerly engineer to the County Council. In April of last year, I went up to the leasehold of the plaintiff to lay off a road. On asking him he said that there was a road which had been laid out by Mr Correras under the old Road Board. The plaintiff himself had a maintenance contract from the Council over this very same road ; I ordered the big boulders to be removed off the road line. Sped* ficationsjj^tioned what required to be dooe^^^^Hple of the contract wan done^|^^HF £30, and included the road thfOTrrolbe ground now claimed by plaintiff; I would not tike as a gift too' four acres for which £85 now is claimed ; I have frequently passed along and know it well ; I would be very sorry (o give £100 for the whole lease of 33 acres, although there is some better land than that covered by the road. The plaintiff actually did not remonstrate, but actually offered to make the road mentioned ; I believe the letter produced bears plaintiff's signature. Cross-examined by Mr Guinness : I was instructed by the Council to lay off the road for dray traffic ; it had formerly only been used as a pack-track. Only a few tuffs of grass grow where the road passes, When I marked out 12 feet wide along the old track I did so along the line which Lynch told me was done by Carreras ; I consider that a good man would slash about half an acre of this ground in a day. John Overend : I am a farmer residing at Crushington ; I know the plaintiff and the ground he now occupies ; I have a farm near Lynch 's, and have passed and repassed several times a week for the last ten years ; I remember when the road was laid off by Mr Carreras. The land is a river bed flat with scrub and a little timber at the upper end of ! the l«ase. When the lease was granted to Kane and Lynch it was in as good condition as now ; I do not think that £3 worth of clearing has been done al* together; it w^' always open to drive cattle through. Where the road runs is on the highest ground, and forms a ridge of stones ; I would say that at the time of Ronald M'Don aid's sale it was not worth £15 for the whole lease of 35 acres ; I would not give £25 for the lot ; I would sell my own at the rate of £5 per acre, and mine is better land. T do not think that the ground oi Lynch's is woftb anything, although he claims heavy damages and expenses. Cross-examined by Mr Guinness : I have had occasion to pull him to Court for assault. That portion of the lease where the road goes is useless ; I do not think that the whole lease would now fetch more than £30 ; I have seen cattle about, but they live principally on the river side. Charles Ksne : I am a farmer residing above Crushington ; I know the lease, and was formerly part owner. There was a road across the leas?, before it was taken up. The road was made by the Road Board. When I got the lease there was no timber on the line of road ; I sold out in 1877; I did nothing to the four acres. The County Council has improved the road. The road is on the highest part of the lease, and the land yery poor. There are some good patches in the lease about half and hal". Only a few chains of the road passes over fair land. The whole of the lease might be worth four or five pounds an acre, but X would not give it. A man could not make a living on it by farm" ing ; it is only fit to keep a few cows. The land I hold myself is better land, but I would be glad to take £3 an acre for it. I hold 91 acres— 6o or 70 acres are cleared, and grows grass and clover. John Warnm: I am a storekeeper at Black's Point ; I know Lynch's farm, and have passed it for the last nine years along a road made by the Road Board. The greatest part of the ground was open country. His Honor reserved judgment. The respective counsel to obtain copies of the judgment, a* soon as a decision had been arriyed at, and judgment to be entered up at next sitting of the Court. The following costs were fixed for the plaintiff : Witnesses, £5 7s ; Court costs, £3 2s ; total, £8 9s. Professional costs to abide by decision. ■ The total costs fixed for the defendants was £14 14s. In the matter of the Union Gold Mining Company ; and in the matter of the Petition of the National Bank of New Zealand. This was an application made for a winding up order of the Union Company by Mr Ljnch, on behalf of the National Bank of New Zealand, who read the , petition brought under the Mining Companies' Act, 1872, the proyisions of which . were quoted by counsel, i The Court granted the order as prayed. , Tbe general meeting of creditors to take

place at the Court House, Reeftoa, on the 30th March, at 3 o'clock p.m. The Court then adjourned.