COMPENSATION COURT.

Gisborne Times, Volume VII, Issue 393, 18 April 1902, Page 3

COMPENSATION COURT.

A. F. MATTHEWS v. MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.

(Before His Honor Mr Justice Conolly and Captain Chrisp and G. Grant assessors). A sitting of tho Compensation Court was held yesterday to deal with tho claim of A. F. Matthows and tho Minister of Public Works, in tho mattor of the taking of land for a railway station at Gisborne. v *. The amount of tho claim was £3375. Mr It. N. .Tones appeared for the claimant. and Mr J. \V. Nuiuu lor the respondent. Captain Chrisp acted as assessor nominated by the claimant, and Mr G. Grant was nominated by tho respondent Minister. Mr Jones, in opening, said the action was in connection vvith the taking of land for a railway station at Gisborne from Waibiharorc No. 1 block, and undei the Public Works Act his client was entitled to full compensation based on tho market value of the land. It was stated that land token under the Land for' Settlement Act Bhould bo assessed at a lessor value than land taken under the Public Works Act. His Honor : In taking land for settlement, there can be no advantage to the rest of the land, which there might bo if land was taken for public works. Mr Jonos said in this case the land did not belong to Mr Matthews. If that wero so, it would have to bo taken into consideration. There was also tho question of tho damage suffered by tho owner in being kept out of his money. He coull not ask for interest, as it was against tho law, but ho thought when His Honor was making an award he should includo in it compensation for tho loss of investment sustained by Mr Matthews since tho taking of his land in September, 1900. There was also to be taken into consideration tho point o£ liberal estimation, This had been fixed in some cases at as much as 10 per cent. It was right that something should bo allowed above tho ordinary value. Alfrod Forde Matthews, surveyor, gave ovidenco in support of tho claim. Tho area of tho land taken was Sa lr 30p, and the section was situated between tho station and the sea. He was going to cut the property up into quarter-acre sections, but was stopped by the Government. He was adverse to the land being taken. Witness valued the land at D4OO an acre, and ho considered he could have got that amount for it. It was worth that price on account of its proximity to the town, that there was no land available along the sea frontage. There were three roads giving access to the land, by Lowo, Peel, and Grey streots. The land was very suitable for building purposes, and ho had obtained an offer of XIOO for a quarter-acre if the man had his pick. Mr H. Warren hod offered this amount, and witness had

another offer from Mr Sawyer for the lease of a quarter-acre at ,£lO a year, Mr Sawyer to have a quarter where he chose to take it. Witness said he had fixed tho rent at £lO, on the basis of £4OO an acre. He had not anticipated any difficulty in selling the land, as at that time there was a hoom on. Cross-examined by Mr Nolan, witness, said that he purchased tho land in March, 1900, and paid £16816s for it. He should state, howevor, that the native vendor, Mrs Carroll, was to get half the profits. His Honor : They are interested in the case, and if you get £8375 for the land she gets half ? Witness: Yes. Mr Nolan: I don’t know whether that takes it out of tho category of tho Native Land Court. In reply to His Honor, witness stated that the transaction amounted to an honorable understanding that he was to give her half. Mr Nolan put in the refusal of tho Railway Department to'purchase the land at £3875. He said that the claim included alleged damages sustained through the deprivation of the land, and plaintiff could have brought an action at the last sittings. T qq • Wif.npaa Ann Id nnt; liavfi

±sy Mr Jones : witness couia not nave filed an action in time for last sittings. ' William Henry Tucker, sheepfarmer, Gisborne, stated he knew the land, and considered that in September, 1900, if cut up into sections of quarter-acres, £BO to £IOO would have been obtained for each section. All the corners would have i fetched £IOO with ease. He arrived at this j value as he happened to be selling land , at the same time not in so favorable a position. He contrasted the two, and , formed his opinion from the prices and demand which he found for the land at Victoria. The plaintiff’s land was more advantageously situated, being nearer the town and railway station. The far end of Victoria township was about three miles away. When witness sold him his land at Victoria he obtained from £25 to £6O per quarter acre. But for the opposition of the Borough Council he would have obtained much more. Witness had some land in Lowe streot on the town side of the Waikanae, near the bridge. He sold a quarter-acre section in Peel street about this time for £l5O. Cross examined by Mr Nolan : He had sold from 30 to 35 sections in the Victoria township, and had 70 left. Witness bought tho land now Victoria township in August, 1899. There were 38 acres, but there were another five acres not included in the township. Ten pounds per acre was paid for Victoria township, and a covenant to pay all expenses in connection with the cuttiug up of the land. There was a condition attached to account for the profits, which were to be shared equally. Mrs Carroll and her brother wero the two owners. He was a trustee for Mrs Carroll in other matters, but not in connection with this. As far as witness know, the true consideration in the purchase of all the sections was shown. In reply to Mr Jones, witness stated that the section for which he obtained £6O was in the middle of the township. He had retained sections facing Grey street, for which be had been offered £BO. By Mr Grant: Ho had been offered £BO for the sections with Grey street frontages.

Bv Captain Chrisp : For tbo section in Lowe street he had an offer of £250 from a'man who had intended starting a sawmill in the Motu. The section was near the footbridge, about ten chains from the plaintiff’s land. , . , Arthur Francis Bridges, land valuator, considered the plaintiff's lapd was worth £4oo:an acre. Probably two years ago there was a better demand, but the price of land was now about the same. Provided there was no glut in the market, no difficulty would be experienced ill getting £4OO an acre. By Mr Nolan: As far as ho knew Victoria township was never in the market. There was a short advertisement: “What are the wild waves sayin",” in the papers about it. He would compare the plaintiff’s land with Mr Dickson's property at Kaiti, which was recently sold. There was a large area of land in Kaiti for sale, and no buyers. By Mr Jones : The plaintiff’s land was in the borough, and entitled to town conveniences. His Honor: And cntitlod to town Robert Harris estimated the value of the plaintiff’s laud at from £370 to £4OO an acre. The land was ill a good locality, and it would be taken up by the monied cJasses. About September. 1900, he sold four acres of land on the Kaiti, and that land realised at public auction - £231 per acre. The land which he sold at Kaiti had a big gully running through it, and that was one of the difficulties he had in selling it. The sections on the beach were worth £4OO as compared with bis sections. By Mr Nolan: Gladstone road sections had only realised £6O at a sale six months »ago. The owner would likely havo got more for the sections if he had not put so ' many on the market. He was sure that plaintiff’s land was worth double that oi • Victoria township. By Mr Jones: He had sold a quarteracre at the corner of Carnarvon street for • £l4O. By Mr Nolan: The latter section ‘ fronted Gladstone road, and was built all r ° William D. Lysnar, barrister, assessed the land at £75 to £BS a quarter acre section, if it went a chain away from high water mark. He sold three sections in Lowe street, sections 42, 43, and 44, between Childers road and the Waikanae, Dear the Catholic Church. He obtained £2OO ft quartev-iiova. HoJ negotiated a

sale for another party for part of section 69, an eighth of an acre, in Peel street, close to the Waikanae, obtaining X 65. He had tried to get the other portion, but could not obtain it. The Lowe street salo was in January, 1900, and the Peel street one in May, 1900. About that time there was a good demand for land, the best in his judgment for years. William James Quigley, architect, knew the block in question, and considered^ the average value of the land would be XdOO an acre. )He had valued in Victoria township for Building Society purposes. They were 35 chains away from the eastern boundary of the eight acres. He kept under the value for mortgaging purposes, and the highest value he put on tho sections was £55 per quarter-acrc. He therefore considered that X 75 would be his valuation of plaintiffs sections. Henry Warren, storekeeper, said that he know tho plaintiffs land. He owned land in Victoria township, and sold a i quarter-acre, some of which had been taken for a footpath, for £75 cash. The section was 14 or 15 chains from Grey street. Plaintiffs land was much better than Victoria township. He had a conversation with Mr Matthews about his land, and the plaintiff said that he would sell a quarter-acre section for £IOO. Witness said it was a bargain, but the Government stepped in and stopped tho sale.

By Mr Nolan: He was to have his pick, and intended to obtaiu a centro section near tho railway station. Ho was a fruiterer, and intended to build a store.

This concluded tho case for tho plaintiff. Mr Nolan for the defence said overy one of tho witnesses had placed a value on the property because of its proximity to tho town. Grey street was the only one for dray traffic to the sections, and this had been the case for years. Peel street ended at tho Waikanae, and Lowe street also, whore there was only a footbridge. The ruling value for the sections should bo taken from tho adjoining sections in tho town. If the land had been cut up it would have been put on the market at a time when Captain Tucker was endeavoring to sell his, and when there was a “ glut.” The value put on the land by some of the witnesses was very extravagant. They were asked to believe that this land had lain idle there for years, and then in six months it jumped from £2O to £2OO. Once the Government had taken it, the land at onee assumed its exaggerated value. In Warren’s case that witness wanted the section for a special purpose. Tho plaintiffs had tried to prove tho value by isolated instances of sections on Whataupoko and other sections. Ho would call auctioneers, valuators, and others who

would prove that the value placed on the land had been exaggerated. lan Simson, Government Valuator for

the Counties oi Cook, Waiapu, and Wairoa, and the Borough of Gisborne, valued the land in question at £l2O an acre. If

the land was cut up into sections of a quarter-acre it ought to bring about the same price. He arrived at this estimate by his commercial knowledge, and what they would bring if put into the market. The sections in Victoria 'township were worth about the same as plaintiff's. By Mr Jones: He lately re-valued the Borough. He could not give an idea of the rise in value, as his books were in

Wellington. Altogether, there ■ was a considerable rise. He was not in the habit of basing his "values on the nearness to the centre of population, but on what he knew people would give, and the commercial value of sections when they were

put on the market. When they got into town, it was different, as they were getting near the centre of business. The sections facing the sea were must valuable. Some of the sections in Victoria township were only worth £l4. The nearer they got to the cesspool, the smaller the price got. People preferred a sea-frontage, and it was the back sections fronting the lagoon which were not sold. Mr Xolan : The valuations about which there is so much talk were made last October ? Witness: Yes. Mr Xolan : And all the forms have been used up in lodging objections '! Witness: You can’t get me to commit myself. By Captain Chrisp: There was no difference in the value of the plaintiff’s sections and the land in Victoria township near Grey street.

It. D. 13. Robinson, Town Clerk and Borough Valuer, gave evidence that he had valued the land in I'JOO for £BSO. That was as a whole. If it was cut up it would not be worth much more, because roads would have to be taken out of it. If it could be cut up without a road being taken out of it it would he worth £2OO more, selling the whole ol them. Mr Nolan : That is provided it is cut up into quarter-acre sections, and selling the whole of them. Witness : Yes, and of course metal-

ling a road as required by the Act. Continuing, witness said : I valued Victoria Township. The eastern end is of about similar value to this. It is the same piece, Grey street intersecting. I do not know if the Maraetalia road is closed ; Mr Stewart told me that it had been taken for the railway. Peel street ends at Waika. nae stream. The bridge is private property, not open to the public. His Honor : Is it not intended that it is to lie open to the public.

W tness : I do not know ; it has not been taken over by the Council. His Honor • Surely it will be open to the public when the railway is open.;

Mr Nolan explained that to get access to the property the railway line would have to be crossed, and Mr Matthews would have no right to do that. The bridge had been erected by the Department.

Witness, continuing, said that the price of sections would not be a fair basis for the whole block. It could not fairly, be compared with Dickson’s or Harris’s properly, the locality and soil were different. Kaiti was a fashionable residential site. By Mr Jones : The valuation for the borough was made on rental valuer Do you consider there is any increase in the value of IUUO as against now ? -Yes.

What value would you put on it today ?—Might or ten per cent, higher (making it £llsO now. Continuing, witness said be had based his value oil vacant sections from live to ten per cent of capital value. The rental value I put upon vacant sections in Victoria is about £3, £-1, and £5, according to situation. The

£5 sections would be near Grey street. Mr Jones : That would make them about £lO at your valuation ?—Yes. Would this property under consideration be any less value ?—lt is in the whole piece.

Then it is because of that jou male the value less ?

His Honor said lie could not see the drift of this examination. Witness valued as one section, and not as thirty.

Mr Jones : I was going to ask what he thought the value would be if if was cut up into quarter-acre sections? Witness : About £SO or £llO to anyone who wanted them.

Mr Jones : Is it not your experience that as the sections come nearer to Gladstone road they become more valuable ?—I do nut think a lew chains would make much difference down there.

Mr Nolan : -Do you think all the sections would sell at £SO or £OO ?—No,

So they would not average that ?- No.

On Mr C. 1-1. W. Dixon being called to produce the transfer deeds, Mr .Jones said that such evidence coitlu not Ixj taken as applying to the present case. The transfers might have taken place a couple of years after th; bargain was made. His Honor said the Court could not refuse them, but lie did not see what (heir value was. lie did not think ai’ those documents were required. Mr Nolan said he would simply ask as to area and price. ... On looking at the plan His Honor said that evidently there was no access to the property except by Grey street, there being no road along tin beach. Mr Jones would have a chance

next day to puL bis client right oi that point.

Witness then gave the regislere' prices at which Victoria township luu been sold. By Mr Jones : He was not giving

prices of recent sales ; ne was quotiii": certificates. It was a common practice to enter into contracts of sale for land for which the transfers were not taken for some months afterwards.

Gavin Ralston Wyllie, commission

agent, auctioneer, and valuer, deposed that a great deal of land .passed through his hands. He valued Mr

Matthews’ land at £IOO per acre. He based his valuation on what Victoria sections were fetching in September, 11)00. He had sold both Dickson’s and Harris's properties. It was not fair to compare this property with either of tiiose properties, the Haiti

properties being far better for sal

purposes * Dickson’s property had not averaged £6OO an acre, as was said by one witness. It averaged £314. The best sections were sold, mostly corner sections, the balance, be believed, was still on hand ; it was not in their hands for sale. On loth December, 1900, his firm had sold two sections opposite Dickson’s. One section, half an acre, fetched £lll, and the other

alongside it was sold for £IOB. His linn had half-acre section for sale for £l5O at tiie Point, Whataipoko, not. far from the Masonic.

Ry Mr Jones : He had not heard that in October, 1900, section 95 had brought £95, or of another fetching £SO, or another fetching £lB. lb; had based his value on what Captain Tucker’s property was selling at, allowing £5 more. He heard in Court that some of the sections wire selling for £7O. In September, 1909, tlier.; was a brisk demand for land, and ■several successful auctions. Sections opposite the Hospital, a mile irom the Post Office, were put into the market. They brought about £IOO an acre. The one at the corner might have brought £32. He did not think the land on tiie Waikahae was worth twice as much ; the place was bleak, though

had gone up. Mr Dickson’s land was put up last year. A corner section of Mr Dickson’s" brought £l5O

but that was not a fair basis ; they could not take out single sections. By Captain Chrisp: He nad lioi

heard that Captain Tucker was ge‘ ting more than £3O an acie at th.

time at which he made his valuation. In reply to His Honor, Mr Nolan said that he had three or more wit nesses to call.

The Court adjourned until 11 thW mormnsi