CLAIM AGAINST STATE FOR FIRE FIGHTING

Chronicle (Levin), 19 March 1947, Page 2

CLAIM AGAINST STATE FOR FIRE FIGHTING

-Press Association

By Telegraxtl ?—

ROTORUA, March 18. A civil claiiu of wide inlerest was iieard in the Magistrate's Court b,y Mr. S. L. Paterson, S.M., today when Raymond iveiiiieth ■Poulgraiu (Mr. It. E. Fawcett, Auckland) claimed from the Crown (Dr. N.;'A. Foden, Crown law offlce) the sum of £15 12s ld alJegedly Jue to suppliapU for iire ligliting services in the Atiamuri area last i'ebruary. This actiop was brought as a test case on behalf qf 10 otlier potitioncrs whose aggregate clainis are £278 14s 3d. Prior' to ^uppliant being put into the witness bos, there was considerable legal argument as to the validitv of the claim as presented. Mr. Pawcett said he was relying on the Forestry Act, 1921-22, No. 48, which gave authority to any State foresfc- ofiicer or lioiiorary ranger acting .under tl'ie authority. of statute, to require any person over 10 and living witliin iive miles of the boundary of a gazetted forestry area, to assist in extinguishing a lire under penalty of £25 failiug immediate compliance. Sub-sectiou 2 of Section 45 also stated that such persons should be remunerated at sucli rate as n:ight be prescribed or approved by the Miuister. Dr. Poden raised two poiuts of law. (1) That the court had no jurisdictioiP because in oue instance the claim was wrongly founded and (2) that it did not comply with the rcquirements of the Crown Suits Act. He submitted that the claim was not liled witliin the time prescribed, 12 nionths from dato of the cause of action. Counsel had ! noted ten points in which the notice ! differed from the claims. The Magistrate comniented that , things had been done carelessly by 1 people in cliarge and the men were be- : ing made a chopping block. Mr. M. C. J. Paxton, survevor, of ' Putaruru, formerly administrator of Forcst Products, who took control of the fire fighting at Atiamuri Lodge, gave evidence of his liaving calicd upon men from various organisations, i 011 his authority as lioiiorary forest ranger. It would be unfair to suggest j they were volunteers. Witness had eor- j tified to the times worked by a numbeii'j of the men. ! Dr. Foden said all the men engaged by State Departments would be ]>aid , but in regard to tliose acting for othcrj interested organisations, they did not ! aceept responsibility. To Dr. Foden witness said there was no question on an earlier occasion of the Crown pa.ving for fire fighting lab- | our when respective companies had paid. Dr. Foden: Wliy was not that practice followed on this occasion? Witness: We found ourselves with a territory of about 750,000 acres oveT which tlie Forest Department was expected to provide fire fighting measures. The scope of the activities was ouf of all comparison with previous incidents. None of the fiues had its origin on N.Z. Forest Products, Ltck, property. He regarded the situation as a national eniergency. If one property went the lot would go. Evidence was given by Anios Corkliill, of Maroa, and Kenneth Ross Douglas as to the ainounts they had been paid. All workers had been paid on the same basis. The case was adjourned tiil April 1.