NOXIOUS WEEDS.

Gisborne Times, Volume VII, Issue 310, 10 January 1902, Page 2

NOXIOUS WEEDS.

PATUTAHI ROAD BOARD AND JOHN SCORE.

At the Magistrate’s Court yesterday morning, before Mr W. A. Barton, S.M., the Patutahi Road Board sought to recover from John Score the sum of £3B 10s 9d, cost of clearing penny-royal off the Patutahi Domain, which was leased to defendant. Mr Nolan appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr DeLautour for defendant.

In his opening remarks Mr Nolan stated that the action was for labor in clearing penny-royal off a section leased by defendant from the Board. The lease entered into by Mr Score contained a covenant that the lessee should keep the place clear of briars, gorse, scrub, and noxious weeds. The defendant failed to complete the contract, and the Board had been put to the expense of doing so. They, therefore, claimed the amount stated.

Mr DeLautour ‘submitted that penny royal was not on the same footing as briars, gorse, and scrub. Noxious weeds made so by statute were blackberry, Canadian or Californian thistle, and sweetbriar. A second schedule of the Act gave local bodies power to make certain weeds, such as Bathurst burr, etc., noxious. The Board had no power to enter on the land, and it was impossible for them to recover. The lease contained a covenant prohibiting cultivation. Anyone who knew anything about pennyroyal would know that it was impossible to eradicate it unless by deep cultivation. Mr Nolan replied that the contract entered into by the defendant was to clear the place of gorse, briars, etc., and noxious weeds. It was well known that pennyroyal was most troublesome, and must be considered as a noxious weed. Even if the statute had been passed prior to the contract, the Act had no bearing on the case. It was only for the purpose of enabling local bodies to keep the roads clear by giving them power to impose penalties. He maintained that the proper manner to treat pennyroyal was by chipping, and not cultivation. His Worship said that he was of opinion that pennyroyal was a noxious weed within the meaning of the lease. He would reserve judgment on the other points until he heard the evidence. William Smith, a member of the Patutahi Road Board, deposed to seeing two of Mr Score’s men chipping tho.tops off the weeds. As they were not able to finish the work before the weeds seeded, the Board put on Mrßrunton. Defendant had got the land for 7s 6d an acre less than he should have done, owing to the conditions of the lease. The Domain was not free from pennyroyal now. By Mr DeLautour: In the leased area would be aoout 40 acres. He did not know that defendant spent £25 in clearing the weeds the first year. Defendant paid the Board £7 Is 6d for cutting rushes, wnich was done without his consent.

For the plaintiff, evidence was also given by Charles Gray, Andrew Graham, A. Tuohy (a member of the Board, James Brunton, and Stephen Scragg, the witnesses speaking as to the state of the Domnin and the best means of getting rid of pennyroyal. The evidence of several witnesses for the defence having been taken, His Worship reserved his decision.