RANGIORA.

Press, Volume XLVIL, Issue 7719, 26 November 1890, Page 6

RANGIORA.

Tuesday, November. 25. (Before C. Whitefoord, Esq., R.M., and A. Todd, Esq.) Dog Ntjisano- Act.—A case against James Moor house was adjourned for a fortnight. The Gorse Cases.—Ashley Road Board v J. Fahey, £12 15s; and same v B. Taafe, £20. ss. Mr Gresaon for plaintiffs, Mr Spackman lor defendants. Evidence was heard in these cases last week, and the Resident Magistrate, in now giving judgment, said in this case the defendants were sued by the Board for the cost of removing and clearing gorse growing on the road' opposite their respective sections. Several contentions' had been raised by learned counsel for the defence, among others that the Act should; be strictly construed, as it imposed a penalty. There was no doubt, from his personal observation, that the Act was required in the district referred to, but he felt bound to uphold the contention first with regard to the form of the plaint, which, was the Ashley Road Board, as plaintiffs, instead of tbe inhabitants, &c, of the Ashley district. Mr Gresson had applied for an amendment, but too late, as the plaintiffs' case was closed. This contention alone was sufficient to prove fatal. Another point against plaintiffs was that while the Cleric had power to serve notice he was not authorised to issue them. Then' the work of cleaning by ; t_e Board ought to have been done by tender ~ and 'not by' day labor vvork. It was.clear the work should be done in the most reasonable way, and the plaintiffs were bound- to see it executed in the same manner as any" work I 'for the Board would have been carried but. Judgment was a nonsuit, with costs, in the first case. In Taafe's case the facts were similar, but the 134 th section of the Public Works Act, 1882, proved more clearly the necessity for letting the work. In this case day labor was employed in spite of that Act and the Council's resolution that no works oyer £20 were to be done except by contract. It was important tbat tbe Board should clear the gorse, the surveyor bad done his best in the matter, and he positively was not to blame. Judgment in the second case was a nonsuit for the plaintiff. Civtl Cases.-—Judgment for plaintiff was given in cases G. Luxton v W. Hodgson, £13 15s; J. Johnston ▼ same, 10a; Cattermore and Philpot v J. Klnley, £818s lOd. :