RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3463, 28 March 1874, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

v MAKOH X i% (Before J. d^thg^Esq,, R^M.) ' Drunkenness.- ~jotyd'vWilliams was'imed sa, or tvveuty-fbuf house* j John Langmuir yriib• said thatrho> got “tight” on having finished a six- months’ sentence in gaol for vagrancy, and pleaded- hard for auother chance, 2Us or three 5 daysV’ \ y Wijuty DiisiißTXON, Charles Flindefs, hawker,. of Cliri-tchufchrwah' charged .with deserting his wife and two children One of the latter aged eight years, the other five years. Accused pleaded not guiltv, saying that though away from Christchurch since January 22 he had not deserted his family, forbe had been in the habit of going away to different parts of the island for some years past. His wife ke-'ps a boarding-house, and be had intended going home to-dav.—His . Worship said be was not to bo tried here, but would be transmitted to Christchurch Sub-Inspector Mallard wished that accused be asked, if he was willing to. contribute a weekly sum in support of his family, and his answer could be telegraphed to the authorities-- at > Christchurch.—Accused said ho i"puid pay 25s a week - His Worship thought j2(ls w< uhl, be a reasonable sum. Accused’s offer would, be teiegniph«d> to .Christchurch,. aivv.in.the-meantime fie bad better find some! bne t > go security fee his appearing tbpre if, required,—Alexander.- Hoy,, keeper :of the Peiichet Ray ,baths, .aud brother-in-law ofaccused, said he wi>uld enter iu.tp recognizances for the sum of LlO to that effect. His Worship then.said that an order to pay the 25s a week would ,be ,'g ran ted,-an,l the .Sub-Inspector would telegraph to i inquire if that would he Clerk to the Court: ,Zs accused to .be released from custody, now ?^-His Worship : „Ohmo ;.he must bo detained till an answer is obtained from Christchurch; . .. —.. JUDGMENT, .Waterworks Company v;‘ the Halfway Bush Hoad Board,—This case, which was an appeal by the Water Company against the rating of tbe Road Board, was heard a few--days before Mr Bathgate took his seat upon the bench,.by Mb Watt, R.M., who gave judgtPent this'mor'bmg'ks follows' - The appellants have been assessed under section- 45 of “ The Otago Roads Ordinance, 1871-, atL3,252 15s, as tbe full net annual Value pf their property, in and on sections 80, 80, and 92 in the Waikah District, being land within the Hal way Bush Road District upon which the appellants’, reservoir is situated,, and rated at9d m the £; in the sum of Ll2l i&T fid. ; I .find from the evidence that the total present value of the Waterworks is L 90,000; that L 66,500 is the total amount which has been-spent in pur--chasingthe. land and on the*worksthat out of the L 68.500, L 25,000 has been spent upon/tbese: sections of land-in question,..and that the net value or total profit of the Company for the past year was 1.7,900, From. these data I de,duce,L2,97o as the'net annual Value of, or pro-! portioiiate profit oh the sections in diiestibh with the, works thereori, ’and’ ‘mPthe proportionate Value" tor sale' of the s&bife ‘ This' last amount, at Id in’ the , £, ohe of tlieJiuuta (under the proviso of section.6 of “TheHigh-' way Boards . Empowering. Act, .1871’’) -at; which property can he rated, exceeds the amount claimed. It is therefore unnecessary for me to Inquire whether this, limit -is , intended to,, ordocs apply to those cases in which the' rate is made on an assessment of the annual Value, and, not on the value'for sale. ’As I have reduced' the assessment from L3,25215a tp L 2,970, the rate must therefore be reduced ffbm 1A2119a 6d to Llll 7s 6d. I hav£ 4 referred to this cases quoted by.-the counsel • for the appellants,! ; .namely,- 1 ■, Tlie Great ’ Eastern ■ • Railway Company v. Parish of Haughley, 35 L.J., M.C., p., 229, and The Queen v. The; West _ Middlesex Waterworks; Company, -28 L. J,, M.0., 130, and have founded my decision upon the which I apply thus - A and B agree to construct certain' waterworks for the supply of a certain district R; for this purpose it is necessary that a reservoir should be con--structed in adjoining district Q, and a main pipe laid to .the boundary of-- district R; ;*A performs, ail.the work imdistrict R, and B ail; that m district Q, No water .is supplied to district Q,.and the whole of. the revenue is-re--ceived from district R. Out of this B is entitled to a share, proportionate to the amount ‘expended by huh in district $ ; ahd district Qis entitled to rate .him for" such proportionate share. As were rated has been- reduced by an ' amount less' than one fifth thereof, I am, by -the proviso in Section 10 of the Act, prohibited ft-om awarding any costs to the appellants..