CLAIMS MADE BY FARMERS.

Press, Volume LXIX, Issue 20807, 17 March 1933, Page 5

CLAIMS MADE BY FARMERS.

+ COUNTY COUNCIL SUED. THIRD DAY OF HEARING. Claims by two fanners of Charteris JJay against the Mount Herbert County Council entered the third day of hearing in the Supreme Court yesterday before his Honour Air Justice Blair. With his Honour on the bench «ore Messrs G. Wright and ft. ftggleston, asscssoi'3 for the claimants and tho respondent respectively. The claimants were John Thomas Hay (Mr C. S, Thomas) and Oliver Hunter (Mr W. .1. tinu), who claimed compcjibatiou amounting to £512 15s and £032 respectively, alleging that loas to this extent had been caused by ihe making of a road from Charteris Bay to Furau, 'which ran through their properties. Mr J. H. Uphain appeared for the council, which offei-ed as compensation £l4l Is 3d to Hay and £73 'H to Hunter. The hearing occupied tho Court all day. Mr IJpham, opening his case, said that the claimants were not being oppressed by the formation of the road, which was "an evident want in that district. The council bad settled all claims arising out of the formation of the road except the present one*. The largo claim brought for damage as a result of the severance of the water supply could ho remedied at an outside cost of £l5O. and he submitted that the claimants' demands were altogether exorbitant. Evidence for Council. Waller ftdwin Suites, valuer, said thai be bad inspected Hay's property* ou throe occasions. Dealing with the land injuriously Jtiiccted, he said that lse considered f n whole of tho land below tho old load had increased in value by at least £'li 10s an acre as a result of tho construction of tho new road. He made no allowance for loss by severance of the laud above the old road, which contained 153 acres, and for the severance and tho loss of an ample water supply he considered that a depreciation of L's per cent should be allowed. This would amount to approximately £SO. Me was agreed that there would be maintenance costs for the fencing and some depreciation. He had not made any allowance for this. With heavy rain there would bo slipping of the fence lino as wo!! as of the fencing itself. Witness considered that Hunter's p'-o-portv had been improved to the extent of £SO bv part being made available for seaside resorts. He thought that the Government valuation of £l7 2s fxl an acre capital value was excessive, nis remarks about the fencintr line on HJav's property applied equally to the fencing on Hunter's property, and he had made no allowance for this expenditure in Hunter's case either. Alex. Robert Gardiner, a. sheep farmer, of Purau, a member of the council, said that ho considered the road had improved the properties. To Mr Thomas, witness said that if Hay had not a motor-car the toad would not be of much benefit to him. Also the road had made a portion of tho land which was awkward for farming operations more awkward still. To Mr Fim, he said that he did not know of any demand for seaside properties in the district. George Thompson IWuleoek. a valuer, said that Hay's property was ono of tho driest areas, as regards permanent water, that he had valued for some time. Tn a general way there was some "bettorment" from the road ,and he thought £3O was a fair estimate. If anything, the road would improve the selling value of tho property. He agreed in cross-examination that it was important that a permanent water supply be assured, but he was not prepared to allow anything for tho loss of water, because ho considered that a reservoir . should have been made years ago. Engineer's Evidence. Fritz Langbcin, district engineer for tho Public Works Department, Christchurch, said that he was in charge of the construction of the road through tho properties. Ho said that a bridge constructed as part of tho road had been built so as to preserve access for Hunter's stock to the water hole and Hunter had been employed i" connexion with the work in supplying horse teams and wodges, receiving for his services £3OO. The question of Hunter's water supply being cut off had been mentioned while the work was going on, and the witness had said jokingly to Hunter that tlfe road might be diverted to prevent any inconvenience. To this Hunter said that they could take the road where they wished. He considered that disturbance of Hay's water snpplv could be remedied at a cost of £O. "Should the construction for this moncv not he successful a reservoir coujd be'made for £4O. For a tota cost of 5170 water could bo supplied to both farmers. Tho Court adjourned until this morn-