COST OF TELEPHONES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19236, 27 January 1926, Page 14

COST OF TELEPHONES.

DISPUTE OVER PARTY LINE. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES MADE. SETTLEMENT OUTSIDE COURT. ■ [BY TELEGRAPH. —OWN* CORRESPONDENT. ] HAMILTON, Tuesday. Charges of having wrongfully cut the telephones of two of their neighbours "were preferred against three farmers .at Tuhikaramea in the course of a civil action heard in the Hamilton Magistrate's Court to-day when Donald Mcintosh and L. G. Osborne proceeded against H. Livingstone, J. H. Gore and PI. T. Kent respectively for £ls and £2l as general damages for inconvenience caused.

"I say it was an outrageous thing to do, and it seems to bear all the stamp of vindictiveness," said Mr. F. A. De La Mare, counsel for plaintiffs. Counsel said that about a year ago negotiations were entered into for a party telephone line connecting nine Tuhikaramea farmers with the Hamilton exchange. The lino was erected by the subscribers themselves. Later it was found that the line was going to cost more than was at first expected. A meeting of the subscribers was held to discuss the matter, but Mcintosh and Osborne believed that they were not notified. The initial arrangement, counsel said, was that Mcintosh' should pay 30s as his sharo of the cost of the line, but he was later informed that it would cost him £3. Plaintiff objected to this, and pointed out that 30s was the price agreed upoji. It was then that the others threatened to : cut the line. Both Mcintosh and Osborne had an invalid in their house, and the severance of telephone communication would have meant a big delay had a" doctor . been urgently needed. Under cross-examination bv Mr. J. F. Strang, counsel for defendants, the plaintiff Mcintosh said that one of his neighbours, had said it would cost him. £3 for liis connection. Witness knew that other subscribers to the same line on the, other side of the river were paying £4 7s 6d. Still, 30s was the price he had agreed upon to pay. Mr. String contended that defendants had acted legally in cutting the line. On the Court resuming after the luncheon adjournment it was stated by counsel that an amicable settlement had been arrived at, defendants agreeing to re-establish plaintiff's connection with the main, telephone system.