COURT OF APPEAL.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXII, Issue 8944, 9 October 1907, Page 2

COURT OF APPEAL.

Pef Press Association. Wellington, October 8. In the 1 Karon compenastioa case before the Appeal Court, Mr Ohapm:m, K. U., for the claimant, contended that section 305 of the Municipal Corporation Acts must ho so construed as not to destroy vested rights. It did nofaltor common law and only gave the corporation an easier remedy than by proceeding for an injunction., ~ . Messrs Morrison and Findlay followed on the same lines. ~Messrs Gray .and O’Shea, for the corporation, contended that the intention of the Legislature, as esplained in section 305, was clearly to restrict the right of any owner of the part of a watershed feeding a reservoir in the uses of his land, and that the clear words of the section must be given effect to; The Appeal Court to-day dealt with Rex v. John Rowan, a case rcseverd by Mr Justice Oooper. Prisoner was a bankrupt charged with quitting New Zealand within a year of his bankruptcy and taking property with him to the value of £2O and upwards which should have been divided amongst his ceditors. The point was reserved that there was no evidence that he took with him goods of the value mentioned, but Mr Justice Cooper refused to withdraw the case from . the jury, intimating that if he was" found guilty he would reserve the point for the Court of Appeal. Prisoner was convicted on the second count and sentence postponed pending the decision of the Court. In Rowan’s case a conviction was affirmed by the Court of Appeal without calling on the Crown to reply. _________