Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Thursday, November 4. ' (Before J. Bathgate, Esq., R.M.) , The Manors Depot Nuisance Peter M'Kenzie, inspector, was charged on the information of Wm, Hargreaves, of the Oavershara Road Board, with having, on October 25, at Dunodin, unlawfully neglected to remove certain filth, dirt, rubbish, and other matter from section 6, block 7. through which neglect a nuisance by offensive smell was caused, con' travy to the bye-laws of the Oaversham Road Board. Mr Stout appeared for the informant, and Mr Smith, solicitor to the Corporation, for the defendant. —His Worship explained that this case, being an information for a breach of the byo-laws, should properly be heard before the Justices of the Peace Court —the Court appointed for the consideration of these cases. He was not sitting to determine the case out of disrespect towards the Justices of the_ Peace Court, but because he h".d no choice in the matter. Although the Justices of the Peace Court was appointed for the hearing of any information for a breach of the bye-laws, when any case was brought before him as Resident Magistrate he was bound to entertain it, or else a mandamus would be applied for to compel him to .do so. He wished it to be understood that he was not trying to run counter to any other existing Court, but was merely sitting to hear thiscaso because he had no option.—Mr Stout pointed out that the case had been heard in the other Court, and an appeal to the District Judge taken on the decision. As, however, it was found that the case would then have to be taken to the .Supreme Court, and the necessary appeal within fourteen days had not been given, it was found desirable to have the matter re-argued before his Worship. The facts were not disputed, and the information was narrowed down to the dry question of law. He only asked for the infliction of a nominal penalty, but if he succeeded he intended to give notice, not only to the owner of the land, but to all others who deposited filth there, that he should proceed against them every day for a breach of the bye-law. It was admitted that the stench was something abominable, and the reason was obvious —all night-soil, filth, and dirt from the City was carri«d to the ground, which was surrounded by dwelling-houses and wi'h no drainage. He contended that, if the Ordinance of 1865 admits of the creation of a nuisance, it was ultra vires, and the Provincial Council had no power to pass it; ami secondly, that the Ordinance does not permit of the creation of. a nuisance. On the latter point he mainly depended. He ad-

mitted that the City Council could provide a place within the city for the deposit of nightsoil, rubbish, &c, but submitted that it must be a place where it would not, be a nuisance to anyone. If the argument of the other side was to be upheld, the Corporation could take any lands in the heart of the city, make an open cesspool, and drive off the inhabitants.—Mr Smith said the Corporation were anxious to provide another and more distant place for the deposit of nightsoil. They were fully alive to the fact that the pre'seut depot was very obnoxious to the inhabitants, and had for a considerable time been trying to discover a proper receptacle. He however submitted that the City Council had an indefeasible right, to select a place for the deposit of their nightsoil, and were not responsible for what subsequently occuned. The legislature having invested the Corporation with that power must be considered as having deliberately sanctioned the creation of a nuisance. The legislature must have corfidence that such power would be exercised by the Corporation in such a manner as to do the least possible injury. He submitted that the bye law had no operation as against section 70 of the Ordinance, and therefore the information should be dismissed.—His Worship reserved his decision for a month.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD18751104.2.9

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Evening Star, Issue 3961, 4 November 1875, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
674

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. Evening Star, Issue 3961, 4 November 1875, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. Evening Star, Issue 3961, 4 November 1875, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert