PALMERSTON RESIDENT MAGIS TRATE'S COURT.

Otago Witness, Issue 1421, 15 February 1879, Page 6

PALMERSTON RESIDENT MAGIS TRATE'S COURT.

(by our own reporter.) Friday, 7th Ferruary. (Before I. N. Watt, Esq. R.M., and Henry Orbell and Blair Fullarton, Esqs., Assessora.)

I'OWLER V. CALCUTT. Before this case was gone into, Mr Haggitt said he, appearing on behalf of Mr Calcutt and the Minister of Public Works, did ao appear under protest. This, however, was not the proper tribunal to consider the lega^ aspect of the question, and he only mentioned the pro cost in view of further proceedings. The grounds of the protest were, that under the 69th, section of the Public Works and Immigration Act, 1870, the Governor had power to take any public road, and that no body or person shall be entitled to receive compensation therefor, and if the section quoted did not give aufft.

dent power, the 73rd section of the Public Works Act of 1876 especially provided for the Governor taking Buch roads without any compensation whatever. Mr Nation, who appeared for plaintiff, pointed out that in reply to such a protest he would, when the proper time came, be prepared to argue that this case disclosed an injury to property adjoining the road, for which compensatioD was claimed, and not for the road itself. The present Court had no other duty than to listen to the evidence, and determine the amount of damage sustained. He stated the nature of .the case, and called William Fowler, threshing - machine proprietor, who deposed that he was the owner of sections 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12, block XXII, town of Palmerston. These sectiots fronted Ronaldsay street for a distance of some seven chains. They had a frontage also to two other streets. The railway— Dunedin to Moeraki— had about two years ago been constructed along Ronaldsay street, but no notice had been served upon him of such construction. In front of his property there was now a railway cutting of six or seven feet in depth. He considered his property had fallen in value through his being deprived of his frontage along Ronaldsay street. His front entrance had been from this Bt^fiflt, and now there was considerable danger to cffildren through the cutting in front of his door. He valued the property now at L6OO or L7OO, whereas before it was worth LIOOO to | L 110!}. 1 Cross-examined by Mr Haggifct : There were crossings opposite the entrances to his property, but previously he had been able to get on to the street from any portion of his property. Even with these crossings the difficulty of taking his engines into his property was considerably increased. It took five horses now to do what three did before. He had been offered LI2OO for his property some time ago, before the railway came, but he would not say who offered it to him., Only close to the railway station had the value of property increased. Had the roadway been formed in Ronaldsay Btreet the cutting would probably have been only two feet in depth, instead of the six or seven feet as now. He had petitioned the Assembly for compensation, and the matter bad been referred to a Select Committee of the House, who refused to entertain his claim. (Petition and reply handed in.) James Arkle, storekeeper, bad known the property for the last 12 or 13 years. He congidered the property had deteriorated in value through losing the frontage, and as a dwellingplace, to the extent of from L2OO to L3OO. Cross-examined : He considered the value of township property had deteriorated since the railway was constructed. Thomas Smith, formerly a coachdriver, gave evidence corroborative of that of the, previous witness, as did also William Little, butcher, and James Robertson, saddler. Mr Haggitt addressed the Bench for the defence, and called the defendant, Thomas Calcutt, who considered that since the railway crossing had been formed his entrance was quite as good as ever it was. Mr Fowler was exceptionally treated, as he bad a crossing laid down opposite the entrance to his dwelling-house, and two crossings were seldom or never allowed over so short a frontage. He would value the five sections at L4O each, and the buildings at L3OO or L 350. He considered, as affecting the business of Mr Fowler, the property had suffered no material damage. Cross-examined: All property was cheaper now than two years ago. The banks were putting on the screw, and money was not so plentiful. It was arranged that the assessors should view the ground in company with Messrs Fowler and Calcutt. This was done, and judg ment in. the matter wa3 reserved. OBSTRUCTING A RAILWAY LINE. John Burgess and Frederick Hankey, two lads of 17 and 15 5 ears of age respectively, were charged that they did unlawfully and maliciously place on the Amberley and Bluff railway line the wheels of a trolly, so as to obstruct, upset, and overturn an engine, tender, and trucks travelling upon such line. The prisoners were undefended. Inspector Mallard conducted the prosecution. The following evidence was taken :— Alexander Young, farmer, Pleasant Valley, Baid : I know John Burgess ; he is in my employment. He left my house about 6 o'clock on Tusday night, the 4th insfc., and returned at 10 o'clock exactly. He was sober when he returned. He told me the day before he had promised to go with the other boy to Palmerston for a pair of boots. I live about three miles and a-half away from Palmerston. I know a spot on the railway lino called M'Kenzie's bal-last-pit. It is about three-quarters of a mile from my place. To the Magistrate : M'Kenzie's ballast-pit is between my house and Palmeraton. John M'Kay, labourer, employed in fencing on the railway line, said : I know M'Kenzie's ballast pit. A trolly was left opposite the pit on Monday night. I saw the prisoners on Tuesday night. I saw them on the main road cloee to Mr Young's publichcuse, about threequarters of a mile from the pit. They were coming from the direction of Palmerston. It was about 10 o'clock. I believe they were Bober. I knew the boys formerly. They must have passed the ballast -pit. Wm. Ashcroft, foreman of the permanent way on the Kartigi section of railway, depaKrl: I saw the tvo prisoners on Tuesday nqpfe, the 4th instant, walking along the line towards Palmerston. This was about 8 o'clock. They were two milss and three-quarters from Palmerston. I did not see them again that night. I iemembor Thursday, the 6th. I was E resent when Detective Henderson appreended the prisoner Hankey. He said, " The other boy put the trolly wheels on, and I pulled them off again ; Burgess put them on again, and would not let me pull them off a second time. I told Burgess we should get into trouble, and he said the engine would knock them off, and we would not "—I Buppose he meant get into trouble. Detective Henderson and I went to find Burgess. He was in Souter's cornfield, and Detective Henderson apprehended him there. Burgess said he was "tight," and knew nothing about it. We brought the two prisoners down the line together, and when we got to the place where the trolly wheels were on, Hankey pointed and said "Wo put them on there." Burgess said he might have put them on, but he was "tight." David Thomson, engine-driver : On Tuesday night took a goods trains from Dunedin to Paimerston, arriving at 9 o'clock. Left Palmerston again for Dunedin at 10. 5. Charles Kollo was stoker, and on the engine with him. About two miles from Palmerston the engine struck something. Witness, the stoker, and the guard got down to see what it was. (The witness detailed the position of the wheels, &c. He also detailed marks made by the boots of those who had evidently put the wheels upon the line.) Charles Rollo gave corroborative evidence. Detective Henderson deposed as to the arrest of the piisoners, and his evidence regarding what was said by them upon arre&t was similar in substance to that given by William Ashcroft. This was the whole of the evidence, and his

Worship committed both prisoners for trial at the next sessions of the Supreme Court. His Worship in doing so pointed out to Hankey that if his statement was a true one he was to blame for not having taken measures to have the wheels removed, as he must have known the danger of leaving them upon the line. Prisoners would be ablts ta judge of the mess they had got into by the fact that if found guilty they would be sentenced to penal servitude for not less than three years nor more than life. Mr Young, employer of Burges^asked if bail would be allowed in the case of that prisoner. His Worship said he would consider the application, which might be repeated to him at Waikouaiti or in Palmerston on a future day.