THE OTHER SIDE.

Auckland Star, Volume LXI, Issue 262, 5 November 1930, Page 8

THE OTHER SIDE.

STATEMENT BY MR. NORTHCROFT. WAY LEAVES NOT EXPECTED. Subsequent to the adjournment of the case by the Court, Mr. Northcroft made the following statement on behalf of the defendant company: <f ln the first place, it is quite clear that the plaintiffs never .expected wayleaves to be paid in the circumstances now prevailing. When they granted the rights upon which our clients eventually took their lease, there was an express provision that if the McKiunons' property and the Mac Donald property should be worked together, this wayleave of 2d affecting coal from the .adjoining lands should not be charged. When the lease was eventually taken from the McKinnons, the State had acquired the Mac Donald property, and had declared their intention to work it as a State mine. It was never dreamt that such an emergency as now prevails would cause the properties to be worked together, and consequently the provision exempting coal from this area was omitted from the lease, as in the circumstances indicated it would, have amounted to no more than useless verbiage. It must not be overlooked that if anyone at all, or any other company or concern, other than the Glen Afton Company, required access,across the McKinnons' property for coal from the MacDonald mine, this way-leave could not be charged. 11 the access were required and refused by the McKinnons, section IG2 of the Coal Mines Act would have been invoked, access would have been taken, and the McKinnons allowed only such reasonable compensation as is provided under the Public Works Act. . In England/ the Mines (Working Facilities and Support) Act makes provision for the acquisition of rights such as are obtainable under section IC2 of the Coal Mines Act. A recent number of a well-known coal mining trade journal discusses such an application as follows: — Many good royalty owners ,recognising the injustice of such charges, have ceased to levy, them when the coal has been gotten 'from their properties, and in the evidence tendered in the Ocean case it

was stated by several expert witnesses that in South Wales the tendency m new undertakings is not to charge any wayleave at all, whilst in old undertakings the charge is often reduced or waived altogether. It is unfortunate for the good reputation of mineral owners as a class that cases like this should help, still further to swell the ranks of their enemies. In this case the plaintiffs are demanding a way-leave of 2d per ton, the result of which would give them tribute from the State' mine of upwards of £1500 per annum in respect of coal which is certainly not theirs, and on no better grounds than the accident of their property lying between this coal and the railway. Any injury to the property as a farm or otherwise must be eventually compensated for under the Public Works Act, whether the access be taken under section 162 of the Coal Mines Act or directly by the Crown under the Public Works Act.