MOUNT SOMERS ROAD BOARD. RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 1, Issue 51, 22 January 1880, Page 2

MOUNT SOMERS ROAD BOARD.

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

A special meeting of the Mount Somers Road Board was held on Monday, after the ratepayers’ meeting. Present; Messrs. W. C. Walker (Chairman), Taylor, Cameron, and Peache. The Chairman stated that himself and the Surveyor had had their tune pretty fully occupied in going through the books with Mr. Frazer. The Surveyor’s report was read, recommending certain works on the Gorge Road, which was in danger of being washed away, and recommending rock embankments and groins to protect the road. The estimate of cost of the work would bo LI3JL, or if piles wore used, L 239 18s. Cient Hill road was almost impassable, and a contract had been let at L2O IGs. (id. The Chairman thought the most important work for the Board to do was to settle all outstanding accounts at the present meeting if possible—more especially those referring to disputed claims with contractors. On Carlton’s contract for gorse fence, and tramway road, it was resolved to pay him L4O Ids. (id., provided he agreed to abandon his claim of L 32 14s. 9d. on the tramway road, as it was cons'dcrcd fully that amount would bo required to finish the road according to specifications. The total amount due to the contractor was LUG 2s. 3d. ; and sums of L2G ss. for deficient shingie on one job, and L3G Bs. for work done by the Board on another — were also deducted, bringing the sum to bo paid down to L4O 14a. Gd. Mr. Carlton objected <o such deductions, and pointed out that the work done by the Board was in excess of the specifications. Ho refused to accept the amount except as part payment. The clerk was instructed to write to Mr. D. Forbes and Mr. Joseph Ferguson, informing them that unless the report upon their contracts for maintenance of roads be satisfactory, at the next meeting on Feb. 2nd, formal notice will be given them to complete their work at once. Correspondence was read as follows : From Mr. William Annett, relative to his contract on road from Anama crossing to MHymont’s corner. From Ashburton County Council, re bridge over North Ashburton near Pudding Hill. The clerk was instructed to reply that the Board approved of the tender of Messrs. Thomas and Hill, and they considered the Mount Eutt Road Board should be informed of the amount of the tender, and bo requested to assist in the payment of one-half the amount. From Mr. Twentyman, requesting that a road bo formed to his sections between South Hinds and the Rangitata. Clerk to reply that the Board will give this matter their attention after the harvest. It was resolved—“ That Mr. C. J. W. Oookson should undertake the collection of all outstanding rates, and that notice thereof be advertised.” Tenders were opened for the appoint- - ment of poundkoeper to the Mount Somers Pound. It was resolved to recommend Mr. 13. Clark’s tender to the County Council, and that all the tenders be forwarded to the Council for their approval. The Clerk was instructed to call for alternative tenders for protective works, Ashburton Gorge, as soon as possible. It was resolved—“ That the Board as a whole object to the valuation list for 1880 on the following grounds : “ 1. That the list is in one instead of five, according to the provisions of the Rating Act, 18TG, section 0 “2. No proper description of properties valued is set forth, nor is a value set upon each section, so as to enable persons assessed to appeal. “3. That initials arc given in place of proper names and names of firms, and mere than one mime is set down in the fust Coburn.” The pay sheet, amounting to L 705 18s. 5d., having been passed for payment, the Board adjourned.

ASHBURTON— Tuesday, Jan. 20. (Before Mr. F. Guinness, R.M.) DRUNK AND DISORDERLY. Wni. Miller was charged with being drunk and disorderly, and with using obscene language. For the drunkenness, several previous convictions being on the records against him, ho was fined 20s. or 48 hours; and. for the bad language he was passed on to Lyttelton for a month. Thos. Joyce, for being on the premises of the Royal Hoteljwras discharged with a caution. “the government whisky bill.” Shearman v. Knight.—Judgment was given in this case, as follows :—This case requires that complainant should clearly prove that defendant obtained the 'goods from plaintiff by a fraudulent representation of certain facts, and that when defendant made this representation lie knew that it was false, or that he had not reasonable grounds for believing it to be true (Addison on Torts, 4th edition—p.p. 835-0). It is there laid down—“lt is enough if a representation is made which the person making it knows to be untrue, and which is intended or calculated to induce another to act on the truth o’f it in such a way that he may incur damage, and that damage is actually incurred. A wilful falsehood of such a nature is in the legal sense of the word a fraud.” (Other authories were also quoted bearing on the case). I have therefore to say whether the evidence adduced discloses such a fraudulent misrepresentation as the law, as laid down in the above quotation, seems to require. lam of opinion that the defendant made such a representation, on the truth of which plaintiff supplied certain goods for the men employed on the public works, under the control or. supervision of the defendant. It is proved that defendant did not use any of the goods himself or that he derived any pecuniary benefit. It is proved that plaintiff supplied the goods. It is therefore necessary for me to ascertain if defendant had authority to order the goods. On this point the evidence is contradictory—Mr. Lowe’s evidence not being positive as to giving permission to order them, whilst defendant swore he received a verbal order from Mr. Lowe. Under all the circumstances I am unable to say that defendant did not got the order, and as the plaint in this case is tantamount to a criminal charge, defendant is entitled to the doubt, and plaintiff must be nonsuited with costs.