MAGISTERIAL.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1377, 22 October 1886, Page 2

MAGISTERIAL.

ASHBURTON—FRIDAY. [Before Mr H. O. S. Baddeley, B.M.] CIVIL OASES. Morris v Murphy, claim 19a 6d Judgment for plaintiff for the amount claimed and costs. Morris v Broker, claim £1 15a 91. Mr Crisp for defendant admitted the claim but asked for the Court to make a light order In the case - Amount ordered to be paid in instalments of 2s fid per week Ashburton Guardian Co v 'Farley, claim £G 12s 8d —Mr Parnell for plaintiff. Judgment for the amount claimed and c ate.

Tocker and Reatell v Q, Tatty, claim 11a fid,- Judgment for plaintiffs for the amount claimed and coats.

Briggs v Ashburton Permanent Building Society, claim £5 5a lOd —Mr Crisp for defendant!.— in error appeared in tho bill of par tic Jars but Mr Crisp ra ! sed no objection on that score—The Magistrate ultimately determined to hear the evidence before giving a decision on the point.--It appeared that the plaintiff had the money in question in the Society and had some time ago applied to have it paid over to him. As he refused, however, to produce the deposit slips the Society declined to hand over F a cheque for the amount which had been duly drawn up.—The Magistrate expressed himself in strong terms as to the conduct of the plaintiff The amount sued >or was, however, due, and he had no alterra ive but to give judgment for the plaintiff. As it was a case which should not have been brought into Court the plaintiff would have to pay all the costs, and execution would not be issued until the plaintiff produced the necessary documents.

Shury v Wabanui Poad ola’m £6 Mr Crisp for plained, Mr White for defendant. This was a case in which the plaintiff claimed the am «unt aufd for as damages sustained to a bu?gy while crossing a water race in the Wakanni Road Disirict. The plaintiff alleged the! accident was due to tha neal'gence of the Road Board in not providing a proper crossing over the race.—M CrLp called the plaintiff, A. H. Shury, vho sail that on a Sunday in Joly he was driving in a buggy and pair belonging to him on a district road near Mr Denshire’s property. There were three or four others with witness in the vehicle, which was being driven on the crown of the road. There was a wa'er race cros iug the road, but it was overgrown wth tussocks to such an exte t that witness did not see it till ckse upon it. The borses jumped it, and the vehio’e dropped in. The horses pulled It out, but when they had gone about twenty yards witness pulled up, as the wheels were grating. found the wheels jammed together, and the undergear smashed. The vehicle was going very slowly. The race was four or five feat wide, and about eighteen inches deep There was very little slope to t e bulks. The crossing wai not a proper one ; had it been so the vehicle would notjiave been smashed Witness h-d the trap repaired at a cost of £5 18s.—By Mr White : Witness generally drove about seven or eight mi es aa hour, but in this instance the sides of the roid being sticky, the crovn of the road to ha taken, and there being a strong grow h of tus>ocks, progres! was necesarrily si >w. Witness h.d not tld Mr Fooks that he was dr ving at the rate of fifteen miles an hour. He might have sail th-y had fallen into the race at “ the rate of knots. ” —J. J Q iane had been in company with Mr !*hury 0 i tha Sunday in quedion. He was the driver. He was driving on the crown >f the roid at the rate of about ten miles an h nr. He generally cirroborated the evidence of the last witreis. Ernest Simpson, another of the occupy ts of the vehmle, gave sim lar evidence. —C. O. Fooka, e'erk to the Wakanni Road Boud, knew the waterrace in question. Tha Road Board had □ever done anything fto the ford. The pr perties in the vicinity paid rates to the Road Board and County Council.—By Mr White ; The race was a coun y one ; and thn Road Board had nothing whatever to do with any of the races in its district. The Boafd had never Interfered with the races; it had made reques's and suggestions to the County Council in reference to thera but the Council had ignored the Board. On the roid In question there were no tussocks within a chain of the ford ; nor had there been for years The ford was very fair at the crown of the road but It was rather bad at the sides of the road. The ford at the sides had since been repaired but at the crown bad been left untouched. Witness had had conversation with Mr Shnry about the accident. Mr Shury said he was driving about fifteen miles an hour. Witness thought the race was about six feet wide and about fifteen inches deep. Witness had crossed it in a buggy ; there was nothing like a sheer drop.—J. Baker gave evidence as to thslojury sustained by the buggy—This w- ; the case for the plaintiff; and Mr White called M Bruce Chairman of the Wakanui Road Board, who said the board had nothing to do withe construction of water races. The races had been made by the County Council. —W. B. Denshire said he had property In the vicinity of the race. He had cmstructsdthe race under thesuperv'skp of the County Council. The ford, about three months ago, was quite safe and fit for traffic. There were no tussocks to speak of within a chain on either side of the ford. With ordinary care it would be impossible to meet with an accident at the ford. Witness had taken reapers and binders across last harvest without difii culty. The ford was no worse in July than when witness took the reapers and binders across —The ford had been repaired recently at the sides but not at tht crown.—Me Bruce recalled, said that the Wakanui Road Board had not repair el tha race.— Mr White snbmitte 1 he action had been brought against the wrong body. The sole power of constructing and maintaining water races was vested in County

Councils by the Counties Act of 1883. Apart from that it had teen shown there was no danger in crossing the ford at the crown of the road. Ho submitted the Board was entitled to a judgment on the law and the facts of the case.—Mr Crisp replied submitting that the ford was not a proper one. Had It been eo the bugey would not have been damaged to the extent of the injuries it had been shown to have received no matter at what pace It was being driven. He said the clause In the Counties Act referred to by Mr White did not effect, the case. To make that an efficient defence it would be necessary to show that the Statute went to the extmt of altering the existing common law of the land- The clause merely gave power to the Connty Connell to make water races but did not relieve Road Boards of their liabilities in respect to roads —1 h« Magistrate had no difficulty whatever in giving his decision; It was clear that th« County Council had the whole responsibility in regard to wat°r races and the Road Board had no right to interfere There was nothing In the evidence to lead him tosuppoee that the condition of the road was Ijho cause of the accident, but he agreed tt at these fords should te made plainly discernible by the County Council. It was clear that the wrong body had been sued.—Mr Crisp elected to take «g nonsuit. Plaintiff was nonsuited. The Court then ro«e.