ASSESSMENT COURT.

Manawatu Times, Volume III, Issue 36, 19 April 1879, Page 2

ASSESSMENT COURT.

Thumdat, Ajbil 17, 1879. (Before Hit Honor Judge Ward.) , His Honor, m opening the Court, stated that it was an. adjourned sitting of the Assessment Court, as when the Court first sat it had been found that the local bodies had neglected to appoint valuers under the terms of clause :28 of the Bating Act, 1876. His Honor thought that a second sitting of the Court should be avoided, if possible, as great hardship, annoyance, and expense were entailed upon people who came a long distance, only to find that the Court would hare to be adjourned. He trusted that the local bodies would try and avoid such neglect m future. He did not maka these remarks with the view of reflecting on the local bodies m any way, but m order that trouble and expense might be saved to all parties concerned m future. Mr. J. T. Dalrymple, Chairman of the Manawatu Highways Board, said that the mistake occurred m consequence of the expiration of the term of office of the old Board just about the tune when the valuers, should hate been appointed? His Honor remarked that although the. term of office of the members might expiry fpt it would be well to remember that the. corporate body itself never ceased to exist. Messrs. Keeling and Hoe, the valuers an-, pointed at the last sitting of the Court, stated that the lists had bees duly mad* out, and bad been deposited for inspection from the 31st March to the 14th AprilAWTOAWMU IK THB TAtUAtlCttt I4BTS. Mr. Pryor said that h» appeared on behalf of a number of ratepayers m the-Sandon and Carnarvon, districts, who objected that alterations had b#en made m the lists, some time after they had been, deposited for inspection. One man* who was rated at £15 when the lists were fipr»t deposited, was now rated at £275; another bad been altered from £2 10s. to £22- 10».. i whilst a third had been altered from £10, to £20, Several other alterations had also been made. Some were not on the rolls at all w,h,eu, they were deposited for inspection, aadi vere only placed there hist Saturday. CctMasel contended that the alterations had Wen made , without any authority whatever, an mistakes could only be rectified, or any kind) of insertions made, m Court, and with the eofcseat of the Judge. Therefore, he held that the. alterations which had been made were fatal to the validity of the. lists as a whole. The* alterations could not be called clerical ones m any sense of the term.' Those who raised the objections did not do so from any factious motives, or from a wish to avoid payment of their rates ; but it was generally believed throughout the Sandon and Carnarvon districts that the valuations were not fair ones, and were m nearly every case excessive. Mr. Keeling admitted that the alterations had been made on the Saturday previously. He thought they were acting legally m so doing, provided the alterations were afterwards initialed by the Judge of the Assessment Court. 'It was very easy to see that the alterations made were don* to rectify clerical errors, which had occurred through transferring the amounts from th» rough rolls into the wrong columns. The alterations, m nearly every instance, had been made at the request of Mr. Sans*n, Mr. Farmer, and others, who now raised objections, and had been done, m, the presence of those gentlemen and several other residents m the district, and were made m order to save the parties concerned th£ trouble and expense of attending the Assessment Court. The valuers hardly considered H fair on the part of these people to send a profe*« sional gentlemen to object to alterations which had been made at their own request. His Honor said that, the lists bad hew* altered without any authority, and them*. fore they could not be looked upon M being, perfect. Mr. Pryor contended that the alterations which had been made invalidated the. lists, as a whole. # . His Honor had no doubt m his own ramd , that the valuers had no business whatever to m»V« the altwratfons, ti\i the p»?wdtc|

was * highly improper oo*. $fc* Ceort oomld W^e iio ogfnisjKwe of the alt«Mtiont, a* «k> valuers bid jio x authoritr J©r acting m the manner they. did. Howwrer; hi» Honor considered that the lists shouldetand ■ a* made up to thetlst March, with t).e exception of the -MttiMnifc, iHhftifh the** were evidently tt»d« to save the fcsopjeof the Sandon and€a»«Ton district* trouble ; but still they w**fc ttoi Authorised, and ©onsequently would nave to fall through. Later m the day Mr. Pryov asked for professional costt; and also for expenses on ' \ behalf of Mr. Farmer, Warden for the district? *tar hid gone to considerable expense* m working up the objection*, and m attending the Assessment Court; but his Honor .refused to grant them. tancnom. J. Smithy of Moutoa, objected to the) also that he Was not tbeoWner of some land which bad been **t down to him. M»\ thought the valuer must have labored under some error, and must have mistaken som*> long itfimp grass for maize, wheat, or some other kind of grass. (Laugh***.) Mr. BUit* appeared ?o» the objector. . The objection* were allowed, and oott* ***» granted; o* the application of Mr. Staite, as he widths* case was a most peculiar trb*, and his client had been .put to Tery considerable expense* m oomipg up from Mootoa to attend tf£«C Court. '•: -■■ ;■■ -•. ' .; T. H. CaverbiU, mtnf r of *he Hank o* Attaralasia, Sitoson, objected to the raliia- . tio* o* the premises occupied by the Bank ac being ewoeasiTe, las they were only tern« notary. He also objected that some land belonging to a cousin at the Hutt had been set down to him. Objections allowed. ■ J. T. Dalrymple objected to the valuation on his land as excessive. Some of the land was. not worth more than £8 an acre, and it had been rated at £12 ; but the€burt, after some careful calculations, held that the valuation must stand good, as even on Mr. Dahrymple's own showing- he was not - rated at more than £5 above the minimum of 5 per cent, laid down by the Act. . . John Purcell, Foxton, objected to the> valuations on his property, m No. 3 Ward, . m the Moutoa district, as excessive. On* section was not worth more than £4 an. acre all round, and it bad been valued at £6 an acre att round, whilst- the otber section, which had been rated at £4, was not worth more than £3 an acre* John M'Pherson, Warden to the Highways Board for ths> district m which the land is situated, bore out the statement of theobjoctor as to the value of the land. Mr. Keeling said that the valuers had been informed m Foxtoo. that Mr. Purcell lad spent a> good deal of money en the bind. The Court reduced th» valuation* to £4 and £9 per acre re*pec« tively. ••- ■ '-■••■ •■■••,• Peter Stewart, Awahuri, objected to th» valuation on his property as excessive, and also that he was charged with an excess of acreage. He. only occupied 443 acres ; th» he had leased to Mr. Whitemair for oeven yean. He leased m block of 488 acres from the Maoris at 4s. per acre for nineteen year*, with the right of purchase ; - but the lease was not yet complete, and hewas liable to the risk of beitag turned out any day. .The Court ordered the valuation to stand, as improvement* had been mad* - on the buad, which brought it up to th» amount placed upon it by the valuers. ' Walter Simpson, Awahuri, objected to the valuation on his land as excessive. H* leased 2166 acres from the Maoris on a twenty-one year*' ■ least, and paid at therate of £CST a year for it. The annual valus> of the land would be, he thought, about ss. to 7s. 6d. per acre, without improvements* " He had no house on- this land, and lived oil another section just close to the Chunk* yard. Mr. Carter gave evidence that ths> land would not canj? move than two sheep* to the at*«e ; indeed, he doubted whether it would carry that aiamber. The objectorsaid that the valuer* could not have seen. the bad m the day time, or- they could not have placed such a valuation, upon it, and; .it was dark when they came to hi* house., Indeed, he doubted whether they had seen the land at all. Mr. Keeling e»piai*«d that they had bet*, over the- land before going to Mr. Simpsons housev The Court re-, duced the valuation from £75 to £&X Walter H. Bailey sent i» a. written objec* tion, stating that he had Wen rated forsome town section* m Bunnythorpe vahioh be bad previously sold. His Honor said that the objector should have appeared m, . person, but th* Court would not insist on, |ft m tKat case, amd would insert the word •■' ! v owner"^ m the. sections referred to. John Carter, Moutoa, objected to tW valuation, on bis land as excessive. Onex hundred acres of his land. was nothing but pui* swamp* and would tak> £5 an acre to. drain it. There, was a house worth about £900 on the land. Mr. Keeling said <h*. ■ Tftluers were- not aware then was so 'much | swamp on the block, and b*> wou|l eonleot ;to a reduction being made. The. Court acx i co«dingly red*scd th*> valunl»ioßv John M'Pherson objected to the valu%» tion p»t upoa 114 acres owned hf htm m the Moutoa Swamp as exceasive. This yea* his land was rated at £45, whilst last jear the rate , wa* only £30k Theie wa* onlr a two-roomed cottage on the" land. Mr. Pit*. cell bore out the statement* made by the. objector. Pad Mr. M'Pherson not been, possessed of; money when he want on the. land, he woujd not haie been able to keep, hhnsetf on it v The tahiiation was reduced to £35. W. Skarrow, Sandop, objected tha% he was rated for three sections, whereas be only owned two. The word; " owne*" was, inserted instead m the. section objected: to. Mr. Skerrow also objected to tjie valusiion as excessive ; but aa he failed; to put i> an appearance, the Court held that the; qb^ec tion could not be entertained. John Fagin, Sandoa, objected fco, the Talvation on his land as >e*cessi*.e. Mr. Pnror appeared for the objector and called Mr Fanner, Warden to theHigbwa'vr^Mrd tor that district, m support of the objection. Mi\ Farmer said fhe land was about two miles from Sauso*. It would not be -an. easy matter, to say what ite value was. Ho. would not Kke to give £50 a year $>r it. His Honor, tried rerj hard to -induce Mr. Farmer to ftx a fair price per acre for the. land, but it pouM scarcely be said that he. succeeded. Mr. Iteeliug said the K«d wm* rated tf only £»aj»,acre, without including any improvements, and he considered that rate a minimum ©»*> The Court did- not think the Taluation excessive, and disallowed the objection. His Honor said that V considered land so near t*«> town of Sanson well worth £8 p»r wtrt. George Ny» objected tOjthe valuation on his property, comprising lOpiaores, on *hi«n was erected a seven-roomed house, on the south »tde of Foxton. The, *sal value of the land, he considered, was «sput £5 an acre, including the house arid- aji improve* raents. He was rate^ last yeajj. at £50» which he thought excessive ; but he pnt up with it, as he was too bnsy to attend tEe A*<es»iment Court. He believed th(j; correct rnlurttion would be about £tS,a Te^. Mr. Nye also objßPted to the valtiMtonjv.put upon .two smaller near Fbxtksp *'s being excessive/ The Court' reduced valuation to £45 on the large section, and «n the, other eecttqan to £6 each. . John Jam's applied to hare sotwr ueptioni m Carnarvon, wl^fh were put down to James JarrN. alj^>d to his name, iu v orde« that he might be enabled \o exercise liii. rote et the next election. Thf ttp^Htaatiot^ w gtt^tsed.. ■•:••■_-.-

the rf^mi^m^^^y^^^^ cesswe {-but B^enJ^, tamed, a*it h*4.not bflen