RESIDENTS RNED

Gisborne Times, Volume LXXIII, Issue 11549, 28 January 1932, Page 3

RESIDENTS RNED

UNLAWFUL USE OF ROBDUG fl.

WATER.'

NEED FOR CARE STRESSED

WARNING CASES

Emphasis on the fact, that any use op water froth the borough, supply for purposes other than domestic requirements, unless a meter has been installed, is illegal under the. t.orongh by-laws was given by three pro.eeutions heard before Mr. T\ H. Harper, S.M., in the Police Court, yesterday. The information in each ca so vas .laid by the borough engineer, for whom Mr. D. E. Chris p appearul.

The fust defendant, called was Ada Foster, who did not appear. Mr. Clirisp explained that tin's was one of throe cases to come before the court that day, the charge in each being that residents were caught using hoses. The council was experiencing considerable difficulty with its water supply and unless drastic control was exercised over r : tqpayers, a very serious position ft cm tho sanitary standpoint would arise in the borough. Considerable oxppnso had been undertaken in the way of appointing inspectors, and those men were still going round. The conncil did pot desire to .catch yoople acting in defiance, of the by-la vs, but it was absolutely essential that economy in the use of water should be exorcised.

The magistrate intimated that, before imposing anvpehalfcv, he wou’d hear the charges, DENTED second charge was aga’nst Ralph Morse who pleaded 'm; guilty. Mr. S. Vj Beaufoy appeared en behalf of defendant.

Mr. Chrisp said that, in this ease, two inspectors went down to def-nd-ant’s house near tho beach and raw spray from a hose rising above ihe fence, though they could.not ritually see who was using the hose. On going into the premises, the inspocto*s wore informed by defendant H;at ihe only time tho hose, was used vns when his children returned from the beach and wished to wash the -and off before entering the bouse. According to the inspectors, however, there was a wide border of plants obviously wet, and there was also wafer on the fence.

Evidence on those lines was given by the two inspectors, also that defendant had no meter. For the defence, Mr. Benufoy raid that the hose in question was r>eviou.sly connected with a shower-bath, but this had now been removed. The hose was less than 4ft long and was attached to a tap in the gn.-Je-i so that the filling of buckets was r n.de easier, this tap being situated on a pipe extending some distance into the air. Defendant bad taken every precaution to economise in the use of water, and ho denied using the hose on the day in question, though his hoys may have been hosing themselves down after returning from the beach.

Defendant gave evidence on the lines indicated bv counsel, and added that on (he day in question there was a strong wind blowing which might have carried the water some distance. He admitted, however, that ho had filled a bucket of liquid manure from the tap. SAVING THE TOMATOES The third defendant was John Vita who explained that lie had used a little water for spraying some tomato plants, he being under the impression that it was lawful to use the hose one hour per day. having missed the public notice that this concession had been withdrawn.

The magistrate commented that the present and last, seasons had been particnnrly dry.- Should the--borough water supply fail, it was almost a certainty that a serious epidemic would break out as tlm result of the. interference with the sanitary system. Therefore, under the circumstances it became a serious offence for residents to make use of hoses, no matter how much they disliked seeing their plants dying away. The council’s prohibition had boon impressed on the public by two notices in the newspapers, and this should have been sufficient warning. No doubt people did not like to see their plants perishing, but they must put up with it, or. for instance. save their bath water and use that on the garden. Regarding the charge against Morse, Mr. Harper remarked that it was expressly stipulated that no movable hose or pipe should ho attached to the supply without the consent of the council. He was satisfied no spray was attached to the hose, hut even so any use of water through it was' still contrary to the by-law. Defendant, therefore, was guilty of a technical offence, though his case was not as serious as the other two.

Remarking that these eases were brought mainly as a warning to the public, the magistrate imposed a fine of 10s each on Mrs. Foster and "Vita, and ordered Morse to pay costs only. The costs on each charge amounted to 10‘s., while, in respect of each, counsel’s fee 10s 6d., and two witnesses at 5s a piece were also allowed.