OTAGO GENERAL ROAD BOARD.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 186, 20 June 1862, Page 5

OTAGO GENERAL ROAD BOARD.

A meeting of the members of the Otago General Ro»d Board was held yesterday, in the Superintendent's office. Present—His Honor the Superindent in the chaii-, and Messrs. Dick, Paterson, Kilgour, M'Glashau, and Reynolds. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirm :<i EAST TAIEUI AXD SADDLE HILL ROAD DISTRICTS. A deputation from the East Taieri Road District was then introduced and a memorial was presented by Mr A. J. Burns, on behalf of the deputation. The pravcr ol the memorial was, that the boundary between the Hast Taieri District and tha Saddle Hiil District bo altered from the main South Road, which constitutes the present boundary, to the watershed of the Saddle Hill. Another deputation wus also present, to oppose the alteration. Mr. Todd, on behalf of the Kast Taieri settlers, addressed the Bourn and Mr. Burns followed on the same side, arguing that it was very undesirable that a main road should be made a boundary, as when the maintenance of the main roa-'l was thrown by Government on the district, it would lead to endless disputes. Mr. Hislop, who said he had acted as clerk to the Saddle Hill Board, opposed the alteration of boundary, and argued Unit it would be an easy thing to adjust contributions towards the maintenance of the main road, so long as the boundary was defined by the road itself, but that the taking of the watershed lor » boundary would involve a very costly survey, which must atbest be unsatisfactory, as the watershed formed no recognized division of properties. If the East Taieri district were to take away this strip from Saddle Hill, it would be better for Saddle Hill to be re-annexed to the Kast Taieri, from which it had formerly been separated. Mr. Todd drew attention to the watershed of the Chain Hills being adopted as a boundary. Mr. Howorth explaineil that that boundary had been adopted of necessity, and not from choice, there being no other natural or artificial feature available in that direction. . After a few remarks from Messrs. Paterson, Kilgour and Dick, Mr. Reynolds said that he thought the wishes of the parties in lha district proposed to be transferred ought to be learned, and proposed that the Secretary be prepared at next meetiKg with tracings, &c. The Cba'rman opposed nnv adjournment, and after some other members of the deputations had addressed the Board, it was decided to allow the boundary to remain as defined in the schedule. The next subject brought before the Board by the East Taieri deputation, was a memorial representing that certain settlers within the district had raised a Bum of money by private subscriptions, and seeking the assistance of the General Board to supplement the subscription with an equal amount. The Chairman said the principle of assisting private eff ra had been acknowledged, bnt he doubted whether there was any appropriation for .the purpose. The Board could Rive no guarantee. The proper course for the East Taieri Board to take would be to make an application to the Government within two months of the sitting of the Provincial Council, and he could see no .reason why they should despair o The" deputation then drew the attention of the Board to the bad state of the Government road, which had been metalled only three months ago. There mint have been gross irregularity either in the specifications or on the part of the inspectors. The Chairman said the matter should recsive the attention of the Board. The roads had been made hastily, to meet an emergency, and loss must be expected, but he might mention that tho Government hid appointed an inspector over the inspectors. The deputation then withdrew. POBTOBELLO DISTRICT. A very numerous deputation from the Portobello district was then introduced. They presented a memorial an 1 a letter from Mr. James Christie. The letter, which was first read, represented that the construction of tho road to Portobelto had been stopped, and that the writer presumed this had been done on the representation of Mr. Robertson, who had acquired property at Sandfly Bay. The memorial stated that the Government Engineer had recommended the Beach line of road, which wuuld save 8 or 4 mile 3, and was the easiest of con struct'nn, and that the only person opposed to it was Mr. Robertson. The memorial bore forty-three signatures. Mi1. Shand demnnded to have the signatures verified. The Chairman said the Board was bound to consider the signatures genuine, unless there was good reason to suppose otherwise.' Messrs. Swire, (Provincial Engineer) Thompson, and Oliver, were then sent for —and in reply to questions from the Chairman, Mr. Swire stated that there were two lines of road to Portobello,—one along tho beach, and the other along the top of the hill. It was a question ■whether the road should go one way or the other beyond the divergence; both roads had been met with opposition. He had, therefore, stopped the work, and had not yet professionally settled the question. Mr. Thompson said, that when in charge of the road, he gave Mr. Dundas certain points to start from, in su.veying a Hue of road from Dunedin to Portobello. ' , Mr. Oliver snid that, five years ago, when in charge, he weat down to see about a bridle track for the settlers on the side of the river; but it was never surveyed as a main road. , ■, . ' Mr. Thompson said that Mr. Buchanan had pioneered a road, but it was not approved, and was as if it never existed. ' One of the deputation here asked, why, if never surveyed, thess roads were on the Crown grants ; and on Mr. Thompson replying that that must have been done by private surveyors, rejoined that Government hud then sold-laml under false pretences. Mr. M'Andrew had in his hand the name 3of some sixty families interested in the branch road, and there were only four interested in the other. He had, he might say, no personal interest either way, as he could cut a track to the other road in a week. It would be the business of a district board to lay otf cross roads, and he thought that the Government should make two roads. • Mr. Baird observed that the Beach residents had the water f>r a highway. . Mr. Robertson handed in a memorial, signed by 34 settlers in the Peninsula, 4 of whom held 1400 acres of land, and beyond them there were 5000 acres of fine agricultural land yet unsold. He advocated a ceutral line of road, and denied thatjhe was actuated by the selfish* motives imputed to him. The Chairman submitted to the Board a resolution us follows :—That the Board are of opinion that the Government lay off the best line of road between Danedin and Port ('haliners for the benefit of, aud to open up, the district. Air. Kcynolds moved as an nrae.ndmsnt, that consideration be had to the population. The Chairman enquired if Mr. Reynolds hail any property in the district, and on his replying in the affirmative, moved a resolution to the effect that no member of the Board, having property in the district under cousideration, should vote. This was carried. Mr. Paterson agreed with the general principle, that roads should be made to open up country, but persons had been settled in this district for fourteen years. It might perhaps be advisable, yeare hence, to make a road on the other side ef the Peninsula.

■ The Chairman said the expenses of two main roads \roiild bu too great. Mr. Paterson now understood that the present motion referred only to a main road; anil that any other would be district roads. He should therefore vote for the motion. Mr. Dick would prefer to wait for reports as to population and available lands, as well as gradients. Mr. Reynolds enquired of the Provincial Solicitor whether the Hoard had power to prevent him from voting. •Mr. M fGlashan explained that there was no express enactment; but it was a general rule that a man should not be judge in his r,wn case. Mr. Reynolds explained that he only wanted to insist on his right as a matter of principle. After some further discussion, tue amendment was carried; Mr. Reynolds not voting, and the Chairman protesting. Mr. Reynolds had feeen informed that the road had been carried on /jcyond the point of divergence, about a mile and a-half, and should like an explanation, as the parties concerned were present. Mr. Robertson did not understand the charge; h,e had not carried the road further than Mr. Abbott had ordered him. ' The Chairman said there was no charge. The Board could entertain no accusation of the kind, except in ■ Writing. ".' The matter then dropped, and the Board adjourned tp }1 o'clock to-raorrow (this day).

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. Thuusd^y, 19th June, 1882. (Before Alfred Chetham Strode, Esq., R.M.) Drunk :—Edwin Jones was charged with haying been drulik yesterday, and was fined 20s. DisoßDEHLrHpusß.—Henry Smithwas informed aeainst by Thomas King Weldon, sub : inspector of police, with being the occupier of a disorderly house, known np' the Bendigo CoiFec House, situate<l in Walker-street, which was frequented by reputc-d thieves, contrary to section 1, clause 3, of the "Vagrant Ordinance, .1861. Defendant denied that there had ever been any reputed thieves in his house, or, if so, it was without his knowledge. . Constable O'Connor sworn, stated that jje knew tue defendant before the Court. On tUa nights of the

■ 9th and lOtli, witness was on duty In Walker-street, when his attention was drawn to the house in question, which wa« known iis the Bendigo Coffee Shop. He proceeded there, and heard obscene and improper language made use of inside. Heard a noise and row there. The inhabitants in the neighborhood complained of the disorderly character of the house. Witness had frequently observed the premises at different hours of the night. By the Bench: it was witness' opinion that the house was a disorderly one. By the defendant: Witness bad never been inside the house during the night. Constablejj.laines Nimou sworn, stated that he knew the defendant. The house was a very disorderly one, and was one of the worst in the town, judging from the language used there. By the Bench: Witness did not know the house to be frequented by reputed thieves, but ho had seen several persons there whom he had never known to work. Janet Stewart staid there, and she had beun frequently in gaol. The woman w.h a disreputable character". Another girl, nf>med Ann Malone, who received a month from this Court, was in the house last week. The language ir.ade use of there was of a beastly description. Every time lie went up the pathway leading by the side of the house, the language which proceeded irom the place was beastly, and unfit to be publicly repeated. Ann Malone had been coin-, mitted as a vagrant. Tin m s King Weldon, sworn, stated that he was sub-inspector ot police. In consequence of information received, he visited the house ahout half-past ten o'clock on the night of the 1 Ith instant. He ww two men there, one of whom had been recently discharged from gaol a convicted thief, and another he (witness) had known in Victoria as a desperately bad character. He had heard the noisa of .which the constable had spoken. ■ By the Bench : The defendant was keeper of the house. In witness's opinion ths house was frequented by reputed thieves. Witness would pasitively swear to having seen bad characters there. Henry Dyson, sworn, stated that he resided in Walker-street, not for from the premises occupied by the dtf jndant. There were " bits of rows" there now and then. The general character of the house was not a very decent one. By the Bench : Witness did not know the character of the persons who frequented the house. ■ He knew nothing of them. The house, in witness' opinion, was a disorderly house, and was not fit for any lvspectuble person to live near to. By the Defendant: 'Witness was inside the house the other day. He had frequently heard rows there. Sirs. Smith was sometimes there.

His Worship: Who is Mrs. Smitlw Is she Jane Stewart 1

Witness : I expect she is, sir. Police-sergeant Evans, sworn, stated that he knew where the defendant resided. He had visited the house in company with constable O'Connor, and hail frequently heard very bad language spoken there. He had heard the defendant m:ike use of very bad kmgaaue —in fact, mb3t beastly language. Detective Tuekwall sworn, stated, that the house occupied by tho defendant in Walker street was of a -most disorderly character. From information lie had received from respectable neighbors, he had visited it on several occasions. One time, a Sunday morning, about three weeks ago, he saw the defendant before the Court ;in bed with a common prostitute named Jane Stewart. Witness visited the house on the 11th, when he saw there Jane Stewart aud Ann Malone, besides several other persons whom he had seen about town without any visible means of subsistence. When he went to the house on a recent occasion, the door was opened by Jane Stewart, and he heard the defendant exclaim : " Who the b h •opened the door 1 I will_ dash your b— — brains out, if you open the door again t3 the detective police. If those b come in here, I will blow their brains out with a bnllet."

After hearing evidence for the defence, the Bench ruled the case proved, and committed the accused, Henry Smith, to imprisonmeut in her Majesty's common gaol, with hard labor, for the duration of one calendar month.

Removing Ckown Timber. —AlexauderM'Naushton was charged by Thomas King Weldon, Inspector of Police, with having on the 14th June, unlawfully removed timber from Crown Lands, contrary to Sietion No. 39 of the Crown Lands Ordinance. The defendant pleaded ignorance of the law, and, in reply to a question from the Bench, said he resided in -ths Royal Terrace. Mr. Weldon informed the Bench that people were in the habit of cutting down the bush and shrubbery, right and left. His Worship suggested that public notices should bs posted up about the town belt, cautioning people against the practice, and notifying to them the penalty. Mr. Weldon remarked that there was a notice put up at the Water of Leith to that effect. His Worship expressed an opinion that notice 3 should be erected at various parts of the town belt, as this nuisance had been carried on for some time past. Persons convicted of wilful depredation in such a direction, were liable to be fined £50, to be recoved in a summary way. In this instance, the defendant was discharged with a caution, and hi 3 axe ordered to be restored. Stray Houses.—John Somerville, for allowing his horse to stray, was fined 2s. and costs. William Lnmont was fined 20.3. and costs for a similar offence.

Unprotected Horse.—Joseph Cavins, for leaving his carriage unprotected on the 16th June, inst., with no one in control of his horse, contrary to the 20lh Section of the Constabulary Force Ordinance, was fined 10s. and costs. Defendant That's a rum law, your Worship. Bench —If you say another word, I'll commit you; so you had better be quiet. Guog " Raid."—Walter Hamilton was informed against by police sergeant Chapman, for having, on the 9th June, instant, in Maclagsran-street, sold a bottle containing spirit—to wit, brandy, not being duly licensed, contrary to section 22 of the Licensing Ordinance, 1861." Mr. Prendergast defended the accused, who pleaded " not guilty." All witnesses in this case were ordered out of Court. Sergeant Chapman stated, on the 9th instant he went into a shop, which lie believed was kept by the defendant, in Maclaggan'street. Mr. Dawson was the owner of the piemises. Mr. Hamilton was not in. Mr. Dawson was. On entering the premises, witness saw a counter, and some shelves behind it, and on one of the shelves he found the bottle now produced which contained brandy Witness lasted it There, were a number of other bottles on the shelves labelled as cordials.

Mr. Prendergast said as labels were written documents, they ought all to be produced in Court. Examination resumed; Witness examined one of the bottles, and found that it did not contain spirits. There were six decanters on a shelf under the counter, which he knew to contain spirits. Witness smelt the contents, and Mr* Dawson gave them a name. Mr. Dawson went inside the counter with witness, and acted either as a principal or a servant. He appeared to know all about it. Two of the bottles had wine in them ; the remaining one was empty. The premises were situated near to the Abbeyleix house, and there was a bowlii** saloon attached to them. Cross-examined : As one enters the bar tbere is a pilaster on the right hand. The bottle waß behind there. A person could not see the bottle by standing exactly \a front of the pillar. It was exposed to view when witness stood to the ri.dit or left of it.

By the Bench : The ■ Abbeyleix house is a private boarding house, anil the premises in question are erected on the same allotment, and used as a bowling s-aloon.

Mr. Prendergast reminded the Court that the Ab bevleix houss was a licensed.house.

His Worship rejoined in the affirmative, aud dismissed the inf >rmatioß.

Akotheu.Uask. —Timothy Sheehan was charged on the information of one William Lowe, of Dunelin, laborer, with bavin" on the 15th June instant, at kis store, situated, in Princes-street, unlawfully sold a quantity of spirits, to wit, two glasses of brandy, not being licensed so to do, contrary to section i, No. 12, of an Act of New Zealand, and to section 2, No. 16. Mr. Frendergast, for the defendant, contended that the information was bad, because the offence was not properly stated. It was not set'out with sufficient certainty. The Court overruled the objection raised by the learned counsel.

Mr. Inspector Thomas King Weldon now proceeded to call, as evidence in support of the prosecution, William Lowe, who, being duly sworn, stated, that he was a laborer, residing in Dunedin. On Sunday evening last, witness, accompanied by a friend, named Lennon, went into the shop of the defendant, in Princes-street, and asked for some cigars. The defendant kept a general store. Witness inquired for some cigars and was supplied with. them. He and his friend Lennon smoked the cigars in the shop, and witness asked defendant if he could have anything to drink, and defendant replied, " Yes." Witness then asked for two glasses of brandy,_which were brought in by the defendant, to whom witness paid Is. Cross-examined : Witness came from Tasmania. He had been ten or twelve years there. He went to Van Diemen's Land from Port Philip, and had never been a convicted person. He had coal pits of his own in' Van Diemen's Land. He had been nine months in the colony! Defendant's house is situated near the police station, in Princesrstreet.- and on the same side of the road. It was after eight o'clock when he entered the defendant's 'house.. There were some ladies there. He and his friend remained for about ten'mihutes. He noticed some men drinking on the premises. Witness now subsisted on his money. The last money he received was in payment of work done on the diggings. He had last lived with one Smithers, as an assistant in the bakehouse. Witness admitted himself to be a common informer. He had received money from the Government He had re-

cieved as much as L3O from tho Government, for five eases. He expected to receive some money for this prosecution, in the event of his succeeding. Michael Lonnon corroborated the previous witness. That was the case for the prosecution. Mr. Preudergast addressed the Court. Two persons came before the Court on this occasion for the purpose of swearing that the defendant did an act in contravention of the law. The case came under the influence of Jarvis' Acts, which expressly declare what witnesses nre to be considered competent witnesses, and what parties are to be esteemed incompetent witnesses. It was Hot as though a person came into this Court for the recovery of a money debt in a civil matter, because in case 3of that sort a man is declared by Jarvis' Acts to be a competent witness. When a l.c.'son pus a criminal process of this Court into operation, he ought not to be governed by any seifish reason, or lie prompteJ in the act by any hope of reiefit.. The learned geiitlemau gathered that from fie 15th section of the Summary Jurisdiction Act. What were the two parties here % Why were^they called solely to give evidence in this case? There were plenty of persons in the defendant's house, _ according to their own showing, who had no pecuniary interest in tlie transaction, and who could have been brought forward. Had they been produced, they would have been competent witnesses ; but, thft present witnesses being in the hope of receiving a peGu-. niary reward, were not competent witnesses. lhe| 1 rnrned gentleman quoted " Glen on the Competency of Informers," and read, " An informer is competent only when he has no pecuniary interest in the case.'1 The learned gentleman hart no witnesses to call, but he would remind the Bei.ch that it had been dncided by Cops and Maeo'ooy, only the other day, that parties who expect a reward are not to be held as competent witnesses.

The Bench considered the information had beensnstniued, and fined the defendant in penalty of .£SO, together with costs.

Mr l'rendergasfc gave notice of appeal. Another Case. — Moses Archibald Lee, was informed against by William Lowe, for having, on the 12fch Jnne. iii Walker street, unlawfully permittel to be sold two glasses of gin, without license. William Lowe, sworn, stated, that he went to the house occupied by the defendant on Thursday, the 12th instant, and asked for some brandy, but being told that there was no brandy, he took gin_ instead. Michael Le;inou was in his company at the time. The sum of one shilling \vas paid for the liquor. Ha acted in tlm manner to defend tlie Revenue Laws. It was simply out of his love for the revenue that he "instituted these prosecutions. He had made no appointment with Lennon.

Michael Lennon, sworn, stated that he accompanied the last witness on the date mentioned in the information. Tney visited about four houses on the same day; He had met Lowe at nine o'clock in the morning according to special appointment. Mr. Prendergasr, for the defence, observed that he could say no more thun what he had already said in the preceding casr. All the learned gentleman had to add was that the'system of espionage, for tin: purpose of informing ngrninst others, was a most revolting system ; that it held out a premium for perjury, and sapped the very foundations of pure morality. He would, however, direct the attention of the Bench to the palpable ineonsUtencie-:, and'obvious contradictions, between the statements of the two witnesses in support of the information. His Worship remarked that convictions in these cases requited to be clearly proved. In the present instance, one witness diametrically contra lictol the other: for Lowe said he had made no appointment with Lennon; and Lennon had sworn a* positively that he met Lowe at nins in the morning by special arrangement. Under these conflicting circumstances His Worship would dismiss the ca.se. Another Case.—Thomas Hudson, of the,. Scan dinavian Boarding House, Maclasrgnn-street, v.a* intbrmel ngaimt by 'William Lowe, for having, on the 14th June "instant, sold, without license, four glasses brandy.

Mr." Prendergast defended the accused. William-Lowe stated on oath, that upon the day in question, he entered the premises occupied by the defendant, in company with Michael Lsnnon and Thomas Tinder. Witness asked for beds, and the defendant said they could have them. He male no notes on that occasion. Shortly after entering the house, Tinder called for four glasses of brandy, which were produced and paid for by him. The three.in the course ofa few moments after this, went to bed.

George Tinder, a miner, residing in Dunedin,being sworn, stated that on Saturday eveniug, the 14th inst., he went to the house of the defendant in Muclagtrnn-street, in company with Lowe and Lennon. 'Witness, in the first instance, went there simply to obtain accommodation, and to inquire if they could have beds. On receiving an answer-in the affirmative,.he quitted the place, and told his companions, whereupon they all three turned back to the house. While they were sitting at the fire, witness observed various people calling for drinks, consisting of hot port wine and brandy. Witness then asked Lowe and Lennon if they would take anything to drink, and they replied they would.'. He then asked a stranger bitiing close to them if he would have anything, and he answered in the affirmative. Witness theu called for four glasses of brandy; two hot, and two cold, and paid 2s. for them. The defendant, Hudson, received the money. They slept on the premises that night. On the following morning, when they got up, they were served with two nobblers of brandy at his request; Lowe and Lennon then left him, but witness remained in the house until Monday morning. Lowe paid for witness' bed on Sunday night; but he paid, himself for his bed on Saturday. This was the case for the prosecution.

Mr. Prendergast addressed the Court, in behalf of the defendant, who was adjudged G-uiity, and sentenced to pay a fine of LSO. Notice of appeal was given.

The business of this Court terminated at three o'clock.'