The New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) MONDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 1879.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIV, Issue 5581, 17 February 1879, Page 2

The New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) MONDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 1879.

A recent number of “ The New Zealand Jurist’’calls attention to a very remarkable notice issued by the railway authorities, and of which the following is a copy:—“ Notice is hereby given to all “ persons owning or occupying lands ad- “ joining the railway boundaries, that “ the planting of gorse is very dangerous “ from the liability of such hedge to tako “ and spread fire from engines. And all “those who plant gorse on railway boun- “ daries will be held responsible to make “ good the damages to the railway works, “ should fire bo communicated thereby.” As our contemporary remarks, the responsibilities of the department for injury done by sparks of fire from passing locomotives present themselves to the Commissioner for Railways from a peculiar standpoint. The “Jurist” suggests that the Commissioner might as well have included in his notice the owners of all kinds of inflammable articles on lands adjoining the railway boundaries. If travellers’ tales and newspaper reports are to be believed, the amount of damage which has already been done by these vagrant engine sparks in the districts of Canterbury and Otago must, in the aggregate, be large; but the bright idea of quietly ignoring all responsibility of making good the losses of the farmer arising from this cause, and warning him at the same time that he will have to pay for any railway property damaged by fire communicated from his fences—the said fences having first been set in a blaze by the engine sparks, will in all probability lead to a result little contemplated by the author of the notice. The British agriculturist has been known in innumerable instances to bear a cheerful countenance, if not a contented mind, when his hedges have been broken down and his land sorely trampled by the passage of a hundred red-coated horsemen in pursuit of a fox ; but it is questionable whether in any case his patience and long suffering would hold out if one of the field, having sustained an in j ury in flying over the fence, were to send in the doctor’s bill to him with an intimation that he would be held reponsible for the accident by reason of the dangerous character of the obstacle where the mishap occurred. The answer to such a demand would probably be a counter-claim on the master of the fox hounds for past damage to land and fences, and a notice that for the future all trespassers, whether in pink or black, on foot or on horseback, would be prosecuted “with the utmost rigour of the law.” Somewhat analagous, at least in its principal features, is the case between the railway authorities and the settlers near the line, and the answer of the one may somewhat resemble the answer we have suggested for the other. The settlers may very justly and pertinently reply “ If your railway property is burnt you supply the fire. We have in the past been content to put up with the loss of fencing, crops, stacks, and buildings, caused by your laches, by sparks of fire from your own badly constructed engines ; but since you now attempt to turn the tables on us we shall hold you strictly responsible both for past and future losses arising from this cause.” It is for the lawyers to say whether the Government is responsible to the farmer for destruction of property caused in this manner. It can hardly be contended that these fires are the result of pure accident. The engines, or some of them, —for we are not in a position to say whether all of them are troubled with the same complaint,— are unfortunately in the habit of givin g out from time to time showers of sparks of very considerable vitality. They are said in some instances to burn for several minutes, so that when one of them happens to fall in a favorable locality there is every chance of a conflagration of respectable magnitude. Some of these waifs and strays leave the engine by way of the chimney, but more escape from below, and in windy weather many of them are as a matter of course blown into the bottoms of the hedges or into the enclosures beyond. These facts are known to everyone, from the farmer down to the boy who drives the team, and from the Railway Commissioner to the man who cleans the lamps. The evidences of the fires may be observed here and there along the whole of the main trunk line of the Middle Island. Pondering over all these circumstances a layman is apt to ask the question whether those who make use of the defective engines ought not to be responsible for any damage which is the direct result of their well-known dangerous peculiarities. Rut whether the Government is or is not responsible, it does not need a lawyer to tell us that in the case put by the Railway Commissioner, the farmer is certainly not, and ought not to be, responsible to the Government. Gorse, though a good fence when properly looked after, is a dangerous one when brought into contact with fire ; but, as the “Jurist 5 very fairly puts it, haystacks and weather-’ board cottages are also dangerous under the like conditions. It seems to us that this queer notice had much better have never seen the light. The question of responsibility for the damage done by the engine sparks is a serious one, and is likely to assume larger proportions as the country becomes more thickly populated, and wider areas of land are brought under cultivation. It is a question which presents rather formidable difficulties, and

it; would be a very foolish way of endeavoring to solve it by appealing to the law. The notice seems like'a deliberate attempt to stir up strife. Perhaps it was intended to put the farmers on their mettle with a view of getting the matter settled in the Supreme Court, and our view of the case is that no more unsatisfactory method of solution could well be sought for. The battle has to be fought in a very different field. On the one hand the farmer must, and in his own interests will, adopt all reasonable precautions to guard against accidents; and, on the other hand, the railway authorities should make it their special business to reduce risk to a minimum by taking advantage of every improvement which science may bring to their hands. Perhaps, also, some further experience in the working of the engines may show the way to greater safety with regard to the fires. The success of the Now Zealand railway scheme is fairly well assured, and it would be unfortunate were its usefulness and popularity to bo marred by continual squabbles between the Government and the class which, above all others, is most to be benefitted by the increased facilities of transit.