BACK COUNTRY LAND

Hawera Star, Volume XLVI, 1 March 1927, Page 9

BACK COUNTRY LAND

THE RIDDIFORD CASE.

FLAW IN THE LEASE PERMITS SCRUB FOUR FEET HIGH. ]JY TELEGRAPH—SPECIAL TO the STARNEW PLYAtOUTH, Mar-ch. 1. Other witnesses examined for plaintiffs in the Riddiford land case were J. Ala,this. (Araiiata), G. W . Williams (Alere Alere), John Quin (Mtham), Chas. H. Barnitt (brute), F. W. Waddell, (Tonga,porutu), A, Larcom (Ararata) and H. A. Bower (Oih.au). Several, witnesses deposed to a personal knowledge of, the property, and expressed the opinion that it had been allowed to deteriate through want of proper (stocking and pastu rising. Most of the witnesses gave estimates of the cost of cleaning the land to: make it reproductive, and replacing fences which had fallen into disrepair. The witness Larconi i-statcd ne ntiu .had a. place near Ri deli ford’s winch had been leased to defendant for several years. The land came back on to Ins hands about 12 months ago.. While m the occupancy of * defendant, the pioperty, which consisted of 900 acres, had gone back into second growth, and witness was now engaged in clearing the land. He could not say what at would cost to repair the damage. At this point Air. H, L. Spratt objected on the ground that this class or evidence was not relevant, and appealed to bo intended to prejudice defendant. , , . • His Honour upheld the objection, slaving he was not concerned with what happened to. any* other farm, and counsel must know* to-day in what condition it was at the expiry of the lease six months ago. To His Honour: The land had gone hack to a certain extent by mature but the grass was holding in places where there" was no second growth. A. Arkwright, of Marten, one of the trustees of the Riddiford estate, produced the documentary evidence relating to the leasing of the property, and also the agreement for the sale of the interest in the head lease to J. J, Patterson, dated August 5, 1926.. Although the present action had been taken by the Riddiford trustees, the agreement provided that any damages awarded should be paid to Patterson. The witness said she believed the provision in the lease for the cutting of scrub to within 4ft of the ground was a mistake. The, matter had been discussed between witness and her sister, who pointed out will at they thought to be the error to their mother, who told them she thought the solicitor knew* more about it than thev did, land after some agrnnvent the matter was allowed to drop. The witness deposed to a conversation with Air. Lysaght, in which he admitted the lease should have said four inches, and it was lucky for him the lease said four feet. When defendant wrote to her about two years before the expiry of the lease in regard to the scrub, she believed the scrub was then generally about three feet high, and owing to the flaw in the lease they could not compel All*. Lysaght to cut it. Had she known then that, there was scrub eight or ten feet high’ she would have acted differently. James John Patterson, of Maimaia, who purchased the lease from the Riddiford trustees, described the position of the place when he inspected it. He stated lie had not tried the fence posts, hut had he known, at the time what would have been involved, lie would have gone along tlie fences and tried every post. His Honour said that that was what ought to have been done, if an accurate estimate of the condition of the fences was to be made.

The witness deposed at length to- the condition of those parts of the property in respect of which the elgim for damages was based. In speaking ,as to the growth on that property, the witness produced a -sack and said he -hiad a sample of the go-rse which -had been cut by his own men since- going on t-o- the place. "I’ve brought it a long way and would like -to show it,” he -said as lie proceeded to cut the sack open, Mr. Spra-tt: And your Honour Iras come -a ilong way to see it. A root with about four feet of growth on it was brought out of the bay and the witness -said it had grown since being -burnt, and tli-i-s specimen had been grubbed out by one of liis men. In reply to Mr. Spratt, the witness said -lie did not believe the defendant’smiau had cut the gorge. The price he offered the Riddi fiords for the land was based on his inspection of the place. Air. Spratt : So that you got the land at- your own valuation, and are also to get the fruits of the assignment of -any damages awarded in this action. Continuing the witness -said -lie was aware that there were allegations of broaches of covenant. He had -seen the lease -and also the correspondence between the- other parties. He did not agree -tlnat there was more fern growth on the land than when he took over the place.

This crui'. ' i- .'k- case for the plaintifis.

(Proceeding.)