RAFTING TIMBER.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume L, Issue 12718, 1 February 1906, Page 2

RAFTING TIMBER.

WANGANUI RIVER CASES

PROSEOUTIOKS_BY THE CROWN

In the Magistrate's Court at Wellington <m Monday, Mr J. Straohon, Comjmissioner of Crown Lands, represented by Mir Myers, proceeded against a number or persons for rafting timber jdmrn tihe Wahganui River without a (License. Those "Charged were—Elijah • Charltbn Hedditch and Cbarlton Arthur Hedditch. Taumaranui Timber and Saw* miffing Co., Ltd., Elfe. and Burnand -{of Hamilton), Robert Allen, Punga Punga Timber Co., .Puketapu Sawmalling Co., Ltd., (two charges), and WaraM te Wihiu'(two charges). •Mir Yon QELaast appeared for the Hed--ditcbes, and (Mr Webb for the Taumara--nui Co., Ellis and Bunnand, and Robert Allen, these defendants pleading .guilty. Tbe charges against "Warahi te Whiu .arid the Puketapu Sawmilling Co., Ltd., ■were defended by !Mr Treadwell, pleas jof not guilty being entered. The case against ft'he Punga Punga Oompany >vnaa mthdrawn, Mr Myers -stating the company did not take.any part in the rafting^■-- --— — In ireferenoe- to the persons pleading (Mr. Myers said the department >did not fw.anit 'heavy penalties, and he *—tPouM only ask for a ifine of £1 in each *case. (The matter 'was allowed to re3nain over till the defended oases were Iheard, and as judgment was reserved Sor a week, no pron'ounoement in regard Xio itihem "will 'be mad© before that.) Mr IMyera, dn opening for the prose •cution in the defended oases, said the If acts 'material to the ease -were admit--ted. The pfrosecutdon -was under section 15 of the Timber Moating Act, 1884. The rafting took place from -about two miles above Taumaranui to "Wanganui. He did not know, however, T^hether defendants would admit that jabdye Tanmlaranui the river was not .navigable. . .-, IMit Tread well: I do not admit that. M.r Myers, continuing, said these ad4mieeions (brought defendants <apparent--•ly within tine meaning of the section. The statute -was general, and meant "wthat it said—or else it meant nothing. The statute twos necessary. The Wanjganui River, above all irivers in the oolony, was- a. river for ivhich pi-ovd--aions of the kind were necessary. It was an extremely tortuous channel. -Along its ©aurse there was tremendous -tourist traffic, and the indiscriminate -srafbing of itimber was of the greatest ■^danger to steamer traffic. The WanRiver Trust had spent enormous \Bvvmß of money in the construction of protective works, and it was obvious -.that these ■works were likely to be seri•sously damaged if the (rafting of timber -were allowed. .(He would admit that

Mie Wanganui fR/rver (had mot been expressly Botifiedy<as coming under the ti^ap^pvisions of the Act, 'but^he o.cntend---ed tihlat the Act applied to .all rivers. -4>ne raft (had 'broken <up, and he would like to say the danger was serious and area!.-;- ■:*■%'-< -.. ■•■• ■ ■■■. >.■.-■■ '• ■ ■ Mr." J. Sfcnaxidhon was /called. He I rgave evidence concerning the navigability, 'of the river at certain places. Th© -danger to traffic <m the river was not : . Jhis object in laying the information. LUafts were a source of great danger to .'j^etiaaning-rwalls, •which toad been erect--ed at great cost—many thousands of jpounds. Mr Treadiwell: What is tflie object of ;the prosecution ? (Mr Myers objected to the question. ..A puhilic 'officer (had laid the anforma;.iion, and it was <no concern of anyxibody -why the prosecution 'was brought. (For iute defence Mr Tire&direll eaid -there were certain facts in connection -with, t/he case which 'his friend 'had not .^referred to. - These defendants had -mills in dose proximity" tk> the banks <rf the adver, and they decided to send trial rafts down the river, with the object of seeing -wihether ordinary building timber conild be 'brought to Wangaaiui and the lower norltions of tlhe pro- ■ "mince at a cheaper rate than via AuokThe result of iraf'ting, if permitted (and successful), would be <t!hat :fimbeir would 'be placed on the market *-€s or 7s less than if sent the other way. The rafts were sent down in -'.charge of natives, and were so oon- - strutted thalfc they could not be broken --"up or do any damage other than what ■TVias recoveraible at common law.- The rafts -were provided Tvith rowlocks &nd -o&ns. He claimed that in sending the jrafte down tltoe (river his dients were' exeircising their common law %xigfots to navigate a navigable river. Mr 'OhaeeMMorris, 'dhairctnian of the -Puketapu Company, said the river was too tow during the siummer months for drafting. Tthtere -was no tourist traffic ":in the winter itime, .and the river'was - only plied by one boat, which carried -/a mail. (Between Matapuna and Tauxaaranui the river was "always navifor canoes. The South Auckland "TimJber Association decided to send an • axperimien'tal raft down to Wanganui. A half-caste had bean employed to take ■-♦■charge of it. He took fit six .miles down the -river, (then stranded it on the J^beach, and a fresh coming afterwards, .it had gone to pieces. It cost 6s or 7s to 'bring timber to Wellington via but it could be brought down the river for Jteas than Is, 'but only in printer time. They could afford to bring :t«ard -wood via Auckland; hut on ordi.aiary 'building timber there was an actual loss. After hearing further legal argument Ibis onship reserved his decision for a sweet.—" 'New Zealand Times."