RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5372, 15 June 1878, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

FRIDAY, JUNE 14. (Before J. C. Crawford, Esq., R.M.) DEPOSITING BUILDING MATERIAL. Charles Taylor was charged, under the Constabulary, Force Ordinance, with having, on or about the 3rd June instant, deposited building material upon a certain public street or way in the city of Wellington called Lamb ton-quay, thereby committing an indictable offence. Mr, H. H. Travers appeared on behalf of the City Council. ' Mr, Gordon Allan appeared for the defendant.

The following evidence was given : A. G. Johnson, inspector of nuisances, deposed I know the defendant, Mr. Taylor. On the 3rd of June, Mr. Taylor deposited building material on Lambton-quay ; it was deposited by his order, and was there on the 3rd of June. It was partly on the footpath, and partly on the cart road. _No hoarding was constructed around the portion of the timber that was on the roadway. Some of it was lying on the footpath, on two sides of which there was a hoarding. The timber was lying inside the hoarding, but the portion knocked down had no protection in front of it. I spoke a good many times to Mr. Taylor about the timber lying on the roadway. I believe 1 spoke to him on the 3rd June ; some time during the same day the timber fell. I cautioned him repeatedly about the timber. Un the 3rd of June I spoke to Mr. Taylor in the precincts of the Court. I spoke to him about the want of lights, and told him he would have to put lights at both end», as the Corporation lamp was not supposed to light the timber, Ho promised to remove the timber, but did not do so before the accident. The timber that fell lay alongside the footpath. Some of it was considerably above the railing. The hoarding was not sufficiently strong to bear the weight of the timber. , r , By Hr. Allan : T know that Mr. laylor wafl building thero. I believe he had authority to carry on certain work there, subject to certain regulations. Carts were continually going out and in. I believe it is the common practice for builders to cart their material in and out of where they arc building. It is not our fault If contractors stack their timber. They can remove it where they like. I don t know whether it is a common practice to havo timber and other building material removed at once from the breastwork to the places where contractors arc building, I cautioned Mr. Taylor about tho timber on the roadway, saying that I considered it dangerous; ho said “ft’s all right, old man.” Tho timber was not removed on the Thursday. Tho timber on the footpath was not properly protected. Richard Thomas Walker deposed ; X am a reporter on the Unerring Poet. I remember one day when coming into this Court hearing Mr. Johnson, tell Mr. Taylor that some timber was improperly stacked. I behove the conversation referred to some timber next to Mr. Alcorn’s. This conversation took place on the morning of tho day on which tho accident occurred. I did not pay much attention to the conversation. I remember Mr. Johnson also saying something about the timber being improperly lighted. Benjamin Levy, a storekeeper, deposed ; X > remember the 3rd of Juno. I saw timber ; stacked ou tho footpath and roadway next to

Mr. Alcorn’s. Between 2 and 3 o’clock I was passing along A dray was coming up from tho excavation. Tho horse “slewed” round, and tho box of the wheel caught tho timber and throw it right over on,to the footway. There were some boards olio fitly nailed across, but there was no hoarding around tho timber, which was caught by tho box of tho wheel. I -was waiting to cross over when tho horse camo out. There was no proper hoarding'round the timber which fell down.

By Mr. Allan : Tho man was at tho horse’s head. I don’t kuow whether the horse shied or Hot, hut ho slewed round. 1 know enough to understand when timber is properly stacked. Eobert Hannah deposed : I keep a boot and shoo warehouse on Lamhtou-quay. I recollect the 3rd of Juno. I understand that Mr. Taylor is contractor for some building being carried out near my premises. I saw timber stacked on tho footpath aud roadway near my premises. There was timber lying on the footpath and roadway on the 3rd of Juuo. There was no hoarding round the timber on the roadway. There was some of tiiat timber lying on the roadway next day. _ On tho 3rd of June I heard a crash like a building falling. I ran out to the door. The first thing to which my attention was drawn was a gentleman picking up an umbrella and child. I then saw that the timber had fallen outwards on to tho footpath. I should say tho hoarding round that timber was of the ordinary kind, but to tho best of my opinion tho limber was about threo feet above the hoarding. By Mr. Allan ; My attention was drawn to the limber before it foil. Mr. Travers said this was all the evidence he had to offer. Mr. Allan submitted that this case would not, under any circumstances, ho sent to a jury. The charge was for having laid timber, not tor stacking timber, on the public way ; the footpath was not alleged. Of course, tire footpath was a part of the public way, hut it was generally distinguished. It was admitted that Mr. Taylor removed the timber afterwards, in fact as soon as possible after being spoken to on the subject. It tho Court sent this oaso to a jury, there would have to bo a formal indictment aud ail that sort of thing, and both parties would be put to considerable expense. The timber was removed, and it tho case were sent to a jury, what question would they have to try, seeing that tho nuisance had been removed., Mr. Taylor had permission from the City Council to carry on this work in the usual way ; and if his Worship desired to have the time of tho Court taken up he (Mr. Allan) could call abundant sclent(fie evidence to prove that this timber was properly stacked. Under all the circumstances, ho submitted that there was no case to send for trial to the Supremo Court. His Worship said it would certainly be ridiculous to send the defendant to the Supreme Court. The nuisance was abated, and the case would never go through the Grand Jury. Mr. Travers said he had no objection to withdrawing the case on defendant being ordered to pay the costs. His Worship said lie could not order defendant to pay'costs. Tho only course open to him, under all tho circumstances, was to dismiss the case. The case was dismissed accordingly. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS ACT, 18/G. E. Harclie, W. Mahin, and J. Collins wore summoned for stacking on the roadway without any authority from tho City Council. Defendants admitted having done so. Mr. Travers said he did not wish to press for a conviction, but merely desired to have tho defendants cautioned. The charges wore dismissed with a caution ; defendants to pay costs, in each case 16s. Cd. LARCENY. Leonard Hancock, a lad about ten years of age, was charged with stealing fivepence from tho house of Mrs. Davis, in Cuha-street. On the application of tho police tho prisoner was remanded until Tuesday next. CIVIL OASES. Rowlands and Co.’s estate v, Ponitt; £2los. 6d.; plaintiff nonsuited. Same v. Haynes :£1 55.; 12s. fid. paid into Court; judgment for amount paid info Court and costs, ss. Same v. Mary Power : £1 10s. 3d ; plaintiff nonsuited. Nelson v. Oberg : £l4 2s. fid. ; judgment for plaintiff for amount claimed and costs. Robertson v. Olaridgo : £2 10s. ; judgment for amount claimed and costs. Smith v. Teague ; £1 19s. lid. ; judgment for Bs. 9d. and costs, 9s. Spiers v. Smith : £25 11s. ; judgment for plaintiff for amount claimed and costs, £1 ss. Asher v. Harris : £1 10s. ; judgment for plaintiff for amount claimed and costs, 9s. J. Eankiu v. Josh. N. Bell : £1 4s. ; plaintiff nonsuited. John Cell v. J. A. Breen : £3; plaintiff nonsuited.