POWER BOARD RATES.

Southland Times, Issue 21579, 17 December 1931, Page 4

POWER BOARD RATES.

To the Editor. Sir, —I wish to reply to your footnote to my last letter if you will be so generous as to publish my letter in full. I am not. aware that I said or implied that “availability” and “ownership” were synonymous terms, but as a matter of reason and common sense how can the power possibly be available to a man who neither owns, occupies nor pays rates on a property? Therefore, my statement that the certificate signed by the engineer overrides the facts, is correct and you might be in a position to comment on this aspect if you were to spend half a guinea obtaining legal advice.

We are waiting for you to fulfil your functions as a disseminator of news, by publishing in full the Magistrate’s decision in this case. You obviously have full knowledge of the decision as you imply that my quotations from this decision are incorrect.

I would like to make it clear, that in stating that the engineer has this autocratic power, I am not making any personal attack on Mr Hutton whom I have never met nor had any dealings with, and he, in common with all Power Board engineers, is merely carrying out his duties as instructed by the board, any member of which could sign the certificate. The position seems to be that the board has decided to raise money by any means, fair or unfair, and they are really responsible tor this injustice, leaving the engineer to put up with the odium appertaining to this particular piece of work. Also the last part of my letter, which you omitted to publish, is not libellous as you seemed to imagine and again I would advise you to purchase a little legal advice as the advice I had was that although it disclosed matters unpleasant to the board, it could not be the subject of any action. Please publish this letter in full even though it may displease the august majesty of the Southland Electric Power Board.—l am, etc., J. E. ROYDS. Five Rivers, December 9, 1931. [There was no written judgment. According to counsel for the defendant his Worship found that George Hamilton’s land was actually 5J miles removed from the nearest available ;>ower line by road and 1J miles from the nearest available power line across the land of private persons; that the defendant had neither owned nor occupied the strip known as the private road since the middle of 1926; and that therefore the particular section of the Power Board’s Act dealing with availability

of supply did not affect him. The certificate of the engineer is given by the Act as being conclusive evidence and, though the Magistrate made that particular finding of fact, he was unable to over-rule the engineer’s certificate. The Magistrate suggested that in the circumstances if he gave this finding of fact the Power Board would see the justice of the case and make the necessary concession to bring the case into line with what the position would be if he were permitted to upset the engineer’s certificate as he would be able to do were the certificate made “sufficient evidence” instead of “conclusive evidence.” We did not imply that our correspondent’s quotations from the judgment were incorrect, but that his interpretation in one particular was not sound.] To the Editor. Sir, —I read with interest Messrs J. E. Royds and R. Scott’s letters on this subject. Some weeks ago I wrote on the same matter and asked you why the Magistrate’s decision in Mr George Hamilton’s case had not been published. Are the facts and the judgment so irreconcilable with equity and common-sense that you have been requested not to publish them? Certainly Mr Royds furnishes some of the facts but this is insufficient. I desire you to publish the facts and his Worship’s comments thereon. Will you please be good enough to do so, for the information of your readers and to show the extraordinary powers given to an official and the ver}' extraordinary piece of legislation under which he acts. Mr Scott in his letter comments on the unfair incidence of rating but my case is even more unfair. I am rated the full general rate when my buildings are over 41 miles distant from any possible source of supply and it would cost me £350 per annum plus my own outlay for equipment, to instal lights and power.—l am, etc., J. CUTHBERT. Otautau, December 14, 1931.