POLLUTION OF A RIVER.

Press, Volume LVI, Issue 10536, 23 December 1899, Page 3

POLLUTION OF A RIVER.

A FINE OF 40s, At the Police Court, yesterday. Jas. Reynold., a nightsoll contractor, waa charged with having, on 13th December, 1899, at Fendalton, thrown certain offensive matter ! into a stream. He waa further chargfd '

with having on the same date thrown certain offensive matter into a watercourse, whence; a supply of water for tbe use of inhabitants; was obtained* "..,,-..'.... Mr MoCbnoell appeared for the accused, who pleaded not guilty. Mr Wilding appeared to watch ttie proceedings on behalf; of the Riccarton Road Board, through whose - district ran the stream into which the hf-* 1 fensive matter was alleged to have been thrown. Sub-Inspector O'Brien saild the case came under Section 3, Sub-Section 18,' of the Police Offences Act. Q. W. Humphreys deposed that residents in Riccarton, jhe understood, used tbe water from thie i Waimairi stream, which flowed past tie Riccarton Road Board office. He had known the water used for drinking purposes. , T. G. j Russell deposed to the stream being used by | inhabitants. The stream was a pure one, ! but if nightsoil tad been deposited in it, it -, would be dangerous- Nicholas Ellis, clerk | to the Riccarton Road Board, deposed that on the 13th inst., between 10 and 11 o'clock, J he saw a man deliberately empty a closetpan j into the stream. Hie man gave his name. •as Reynolds. Witness asked torn if he did not know he was doing wrong by emptying into the creek, and he replied that he did not. The defendant was very like the man, and he told him he should lay* an information. The | next morning witness eaid another man visited the spot, and found soiled paper there, and stuck in the willows a bit down the stream. He knew the inhabitants used the water of the stream. Richard Verrans, foreman to the Riccarton Road Board, J. . Jarman, and Constable Cullen also gave cviI dence. Mr McConnell said the defence was j a denial of the charge. Hie defendant, Jas. 1 Reynolds, stated that, from the cart to the closet was a row of trees, .tbe branches of : which he moved on one side with one hand to prevent them knocking over his bucketThese branches -would make a noise similar to emptying the bucket in the stream. Mr McConnell submitted that Mr. Ellis had been j misled by the noise. In cross-examination, I defendant was asked a> question which his ! counsel held was not admissible. The j Bench admitted the question as affecting the 'credibility of the witness. The Chairman j said the majority of the Bench were of I opinion that an offence had been committed. ; The two informations would be treated as j one, and defendant fined 40s and costs.