LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1445, 21 May 1912, Page 3

LAW REPORTS.

CLAIM FOE COMPENSATION. TEE MIRAMAR CASK. further evidence in support of claimant's case was taken before the Compensation Court yesterday morning, in the action in which ,l'lll,o'on was claimed as cnmr.ensati:a for loss sustained through tho taking of laud. The land includes three sections situale in Watt's Peninsula (Minimal-), Block VII. Port Nicholson Survey District. IJuder proclamation, dated June 25, IDOSI, the lands were vested in the Wellington Harbour Board for the purpose of enabling spoil tc be taken therefrom in order to carry out reclamation in Ivvans Bay. The claim (particulars of which were published on Saturday) is being heard before Mr. Justice Chapman, and silting with him as assessors are Mr. W. G. Poster and Mt. W. M. Hnnainy.

Air. tj. I'. Skorrett, K.C., with Mr. SI. livers, appearing [or the claimant (11. X. Jl'Leod), and Jlr. T. S. Weston, with 31r. T. Xeave, is appearing for the Wellington Harbour Board. A considerable (iiiantity of evidence hail been taken on Friday aaid .Saturday and .several other witnesses were -called in .support of claimant's case, which closed just before 1 p.m. In the afternoon, Mr. Weston outlined the case from the point of view of (he Harbour Board. There were, he said, practically two alternative claims put forward by Mr. M'l.eod—a claim for land regarded as a site for a brick-making concern, and a claim for the value c,f land as a residential proposition. These claims were entirely distinct from as thev were incompatible with one another. It was ursed by the claimant that the land was valuable for residential purposes, because of its height, but if Mr. M'J.ood's brick-makinff project were to be put'-into operation and the land levelled down to a rock l»ttom the land would lose' its residential value. Therefore, unless the Court found tint the claimant's • commercial scheme was feasible, the value of the land should be assessed for residential pu'rpicss only. Prior to January, 180S, the brick-making scheme put forward, by the claimant was eutireh- in. the air. It was not until the Harbour Board's plans were known that M'Lcod look any active steps. Counsel outlined the .evidence he proposed to call as to the suitability of the material on the land for brick-making purposes. As for the second-class metal (the, only grade to be found on the land) there was verv little demand for it. Evidence would also be called to show that M'l.eml's estimate of/the residential value of the propertv was based on the value of Miramar land before the boom burst. Tho present value was considerably less. It might have bean an unfortunate thing for M'Leod that the Harbour Board did not take his land when the boom was at i its height, but that was the most that could be said. After a reference to sales that had taken place, counsel proceeded to call his witnesses. _ William Alfred Chote, . brick manufacturer, of the Silverstream Brick and Tile Co., who had made a recent inspection of the claimant's property with a view lo estimating its value for bricks, declared that for his own. part he would not look at it all. He did not consider there was sufficient suitable material to warrant anvone putting down a brickmaking pant. During the past few years there had been no °reat demand for bricks, and it claimant 0 had been turning put a large quantity he would have, had difficulty in disposing of them at a profit To Mr. Bkerrett:'.He would not den} that good bricks could be made from material found oh the property. Witness had not made any op these tests himself. In his own business lie had a machine lor orinding rotten rogk, but would sooner lie without it. The sample bricks before him were good, but the rough samples of clay that had merely been burnt. would not satisfy him for/ his own business. lie would not deny that the present profit on bricks, was as- per 1000. _ W H Morton, city engineer, considered that claimant's laud was of no particular ; vr.lue for supplying second-class metal. Ho did not think the erection of a brickmaking plant oil the property would be justified. , , . To Mr. 31 vers: When ho made a .report to the Harbour Board in connection with the reclamation works he did not have tie idea thn> Miramar was going to be the great industrial centre of the district. In his report, the prices he had placed on land that would be reclaimed were the' prices that would be required if the reclamation scheme were to be a payable one. He had never recommended the work. Other witnesses followed, but the hearin" had not concluded at'. 5 p.m., when the Court adjourned until 10,30 a.m. today.