ASHBURTON^-THIS DAY. (Before Mr V. G. Day, S.M.) By-Law Breaches. John Bladder (Inspector for tho Borough Council) proceeded against William Beach for riding a cycle without a light, between' the hours of sunset:aiid ,'sunrise;—defendant stated that he understood a person was allowed to ride an hour after sunset without a light. —John Blackler said that defendant was riding his bicycle on the footpath on January 28 about 8.30 phn. He was not sure of the time to a few niinui" ;.—The Bench stated that the sun had sat at 7.27 p.m. on the date in question.—Plaintiff desired] time to call witnesses, and the case was( adjourned for a week. Ernest Joll was charged with cycling on tho footpath, and pleaded guilty. A ( fine of ss, with 7s costs, was imposed. Drunkenness. Andrew Hope, was charged with being,found drunk on the Asljburton railway station on February 12. He pleaded guilty, and was fined 20s, in default 48 hours' imprisonment. Failure to Keep Water-Races Clean.
The Ashburton County Council (Mr Pnrnell) proceeded against D.aniel James Daly and Patrick Joseph Daly for failing to kejp a water-race' in good order and repaijjj. Defendants pleaded guilty.—Mr PuKnell said that in consequence of! defendants' neglect others had had to go ■shorts of water - just at the time when water was needed. —1( or the defence it was stated that pressure of time had been the cause of , the neglect.—His Worship said it was the duty of all farmers to keep the waterraces clean. A fine of 40s, with 7s costs and £1 Is professional costs, was imposed. Joseph Doherty (Mr Kennedy) was similarly charged. —Alonso Dray ton, vater ranger for rthe County Council, stated that the race in question ran next to defendant's property, and he was liable for keeping it in order.'— Mr Purnell explained ,that the waterraces were not formed on the road for the benefit of the public, but for the I good of the farmers holding adjoining land, and quoted the Act giving power to proceed against farmers neglecting to clean races on roads adjoining their property and making the farmers responsible' for cleaning and repairing them. —Witness said that the race was in a dirty condition. t lie had notified defendant of the condition more than once, .but only a little had been done to the race. The gorse obstructed the flow of water.—By Mr Kennedy: He had had no complaints from farmers as regards lack of water. There was no water running to waste. —By Mr Purnell: The water did not run freely. The silt was there, in consequence of the race not being cleaned:—-Alexan-der Anderson stated that tho race Jn question was very dirty. It was full of silt and gorse, and needed cleaning. —By Mr Kennedy: Witness had been in the County Council's employ for about four years. There had been no prosecution during the former inspec-tors-time. There was a good, flow of, water, but it \yas not flowing freely.— Joseph Doherty (tho defendant) stated that the race was in the same order that it had been for the past 17 years.' No neighbour had ever complained. The silt was river s^ilt, and the more that was taken out tire more the race would scour /, There was a good flow of water, and he tested it and found that it ran about a chain to the minute, or nearly a mile an hour. The neighbours had never complained, and no water ran to waste, only in flood time. His father had objected to the 'race, which was of no use to witness, as he had plentey of water without it.— By Mr Purnell: There might have been a small quantity of gorse in the race; there was also silt in it. He had cleaned the race when the water was turned off. He had done a little to the race since receiving the summons. He had riot taken much notice of the ranger, as he (witness) thought the i : ranger did not know what he was talking about.—By Mr Kennedy:. Nearly every day something; got into the race that needed taking out, and it needed attention. after • every storm. —Kate Doherty. gave corroborative evidence. There was no obstruction to the race.— Fy Mr Purnell: They had objected to having the race or anything to do with it. Witness did not know what_ state the race had been in at the: time of the alleged offence.—Willia-mArgyle,"a farmer, stated that defendant lived a mile and a-half from witness, farther up the race. . He had known the race for many years, and had nevei^ seen it obstructed or, not running freely. In times of flood the race overflowed, and ran down the road for miles. There was corse on either side but it did not stop the water.—By Mr Purnell: He had seen the race a week ago. He had not seen any watercress in the race. Witness had not examined the race.—By Mr, Kennedy: He passed the race continually; it was in good order in January.—His. Worship stated that he< would enter a y conviction, but as the case was not nearly so bad as the, majority of 'similar ones and as there was no "actual obstruction; of : the water, .defendant would merely'have to pay costs. ffl
Indebtedness. I M. D. Brown (M;r Buchanan) obtained a verdict against Ernest Stokes for |' the sum of £7 12s,,.with costs. .
Permanent link to this item
Ashburton Guardian, Ashburton Guardian, Volume XXXIII, Issue 8793, 13 February 1914
MAGISTERIAL. Ashburton Guardian, Volume XXXIII, Issue 8793, 13 February 1914
Using This Item
See our copyright guide for information on how you may use this title.