WARDENS COURT.

Otago Witness, Issue 2451, 6 March 1901, Page 19

WARDENS COURT.

Fbiday, March 1. (Before Mr E. H. Carew, Warden.)

John Hunter applied to surrender his holding over section 11, block I, and section 3, block V, Nenthorn. — Surrender accepted.

T. B. Fairbairn applied for a license to construct a race traversing section 10, block XI, Mount Hyde, and section 3, block XVI, Maungatua. The race would be one mile in* length, and run alongside the Taieri River, and would be constructed within two years at a cost of £3000. — There were no objections to this.

T. B. Fairbairn applied for a license to construct a water race, which would extend from the Lee Stream to the junction of the Taieri an dthe Lee on the south side. The race would be three miles in length, would be completed in 18 months, and would cost £8550. The object was the supply of water to generate electrical power. Mr Cook appeared to object on behalf of the New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Company, and Mr Chapman to support the application. — Mr Cook said that his clients objected because it would render useless a property in which they were interested, and seriously endanger the lives of the stock upon that property. His clients wanted to have a fence placed around the race that should be sheep proof, then they would be satisfied to withdraw their objection. — Mr Chapman did not object to this, only requiring that the award be amended to make it compulsory for his clients to put up the fence only where it was practicable and necessary. He would not object to the granting of £3 3s costs against the council.

Thomas Bolster Fairbairn, town clerk to the City of Dunedin, applied for a license for a dam across the Taieri River between section 10, block XI, Mount Hyde district, and section 17, block XVI, Maungatua district.

Mr F. R. Chapman appeared, on behalf of the corporation, in support of the application. — Mr Hosking appeared to object on behalf of the Taieri County Council, Mr Fred. Calvert for G-eorge Webb, farmer, North Taieri, and Mr D. Reid for Allan Boyd, farmer.

Mr Chapman called formal evidence in support of the application.

Mr Hosking said that this dam was one of enormous magnitude, and he believed it would be the largest in the colony. It had nothing whatever to do with mining, which was primarily the scope of the Warden's Court. The area covered by water would run back over three miles; it would be in some places 32ft deep, and the water would fill numerous side gullies. The exact quantity of water that it would contain he was unable to say, but he would ask Mr Hay later on. It would be almost certain that if this dam were to burst serious damage would be done to the public works in the Taieri Plain. The most expensive bridge that the Taieri County had erected was immediately below this dam, near Outram. The Taieri County Council desired to be satisfied that the corporation would be responsible for any damage that might arise from the bursting of the dam. They would certainly object to the license being granted to Mr Fairbairn, who, unless he was an heir to one of the Vanderbilts, might be unequal to the task of meeting the claims that might arise. The license oiight to be granted to someone who could be responsible for damage that might ensue. Supposing that the dam burst through negligence, with all due respect to Mr Fairbairn, they wished for someone as wealthy as the corporation against whom proceedings could be taken to recover.

The W* r d en: Does the act provide that the corporation can hold the license in the name of somebody else?

Mr Chapman replied in the affirmative. Mr Hosking, continuing, said that the county objected to a man of straw being made the trustee. Being such a, large work, it was reasonable to ask that it should not be granted in the name of any other person, but the corporation. Then the further question arose: Had the Corporation of Dunedin the power to construct this dam? And if it had not, it might be urged when it came to a question of damage, that they could not proceed against them, so that it should be clear that the corporation in undertaking this work, should be doing so within its power and rendering itself responsible. It was suggested that this only could be done if the license were granted to the corporation. Counsel thought it was rather one of those works pfkicb, should have been »utho-

rised by act of Parliament, instead of by the Warden's Court. The question of whether this dam should be allowed to exist could be dealt with more properly by Parliament, from a public point of view, than by the Warden's Court. It would be for his Worship to consider whether it would not be better to adjourn the application until such time as the corporation could apply to Parliament for the necessary authority. The Mining Act, while authorising the warden to grant the license, had never yet been used for the purpose of abtaining authority to construct a dam of the size of the one projected on the Taieri, although, of couse, it was within the power of the warden to grant water rights for domestic and industrial purposes. They kiiew of cases where public works had been undertaken by local bodies — the Dunedin water supply, for instance, had been authorised by act of Parliament.

Mr Chapman said that the Silverstream waterworks had not been authorised by Parliament.

Mr Jlosking replied that this was so in the case of the dam known as " the reservoir " (Rosa's Creek). The corporation, for the purposes of the small gain — the difference between water and steam power for generating electricity — ought not to be allowed to create this element of danger. The corporation had no clear power to hold this right so as to render itself subject to liability, and therefore the right ought not to be granted, until they put themselves in a position to undertake the liability. It ought to be clear to his Worship that if they got the right they could be held responsible for it. Mr Chapman, in reply, said that he took the question to be one of terms. The application had been made by a trustee for the corporation. There was a rush for the water right by speculators, and it had be°n desirable to move promptly in the matter. It was all along contemplated that whatever liability should arise in the proper sense of the term should be assumed by the corporation. His friend v,-^-mistaken in saying that water rights of this kind were primarily for mining purposes. The Mining Act recognised water rights for other purposes than for mining. Generating electricity was one of the purposes for which water rights could be taken up. Mr Hosking : You are applying for a dam.

Mr Chapman, continuing, said that this dam ■was to feed a water race, and was necessarj in order to have a water race a mile long instead of many miles, and in order to make the construction of the water race practicable. To use a water supply in connection with tramways as a means of generating electric power was one of the things directly contemplated by the act. As to the size of the dam, it was certainly a large one, but there were several other works in the province — in existence or in contemplation that were quite as large. There was one being constructed near Alexandra— the Bonanza — which was quite as large. Lake Onslow, at the head of the Teviot, was larger. The question was whether or not this was a safe work. Counsel was told by engineers that looking at the amount of money it was proposed to spend on this dam and the size of the wall, it was as absolutely safe a work as an engineer could contemplate. The council had no desire to evade any reasonable liability, and, further, it was contemplated that Parliament should be asked to confirm this license. That had been done last session in regard to the Alexandra Borough water race. As to the Railway department, counsel understood that Mr Fraser had instructions from headquarters to stipulate that the corporation should be responsible for any damage the property of the department might sustain in the event of an accident.

Mr Rob?rt Hay, in the course of his evidence, expressed the opinion that the corporation -would be running; no risk if the dam were properly constructed.

In regard to the claims of Messrs Boyd and Webb, Mr Chapman said he understood that they were claims for compensation, and he admitted that the license should be granted subject to these claims. At this stage the Warden adjourned the case until Tuesday next, to hear the obiections of Mr Fraser on behalf of the Eaihvay department.