TARANAKI COUNTY BRIDGE RATE.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume L, Issue 60, 18 September 1907, Page 2

TARANAKI COUNTY BRIDGE RATE.

WAITARA RATEPAYERS LIABLE.

In llio Magistrate's Court on Tuesday morning, before Mr 11. S. Fitzherbert, N.M., the Taranaki County Council sought to recover from Thomas liucliinan, of Waitara, the sum of 3s 7d, be- l ■!ig the amount, of the special bridge ■ate levied in the County. Mr Eoy apwared for the plaintiff Council, and Mr I'.uchanan conducted his own case. , In opening, Mr Roy said the claim ' was for the amount of what was known as the "bridge" rate levied by the. Council under special order. Mr Buchanan would admit that the rate was legally made, that his property in Waitara was in the County of Taranaki at the time of the striking of the rate, and that he received the rate demand. Robert Ellis, the County clerk, gave formal evidence. He had no knowledge of a conference of the Taranaki County Council and the Waitara Borough Council's representatives in 1905 to arrive at an adjustment of accounts consequent on the formation of a borough out of the Taranaki and Clifton Counties. Mr Roy said he was somewhat handicapped in not being opposed by a member of the profession. He did not want to Imrke Mr Buchanan's evidence, but lie might save time by pointing out that at that time there was no power to make any such adjustment. The defendant stated that on April l»th, IRII3, delegates of the two local bodies met for the purpose of adjusting accounts. A balance-sheet was produced by the County delegates, but it was use'iss, and they had to start de novo.

After other matters had been discussed the conference went into the matter of the Waitara borough's share of the

bridge rate. Amongst the liabilities that the county brought before the borough were the cost of a bridge somewhere in the Inglewood district, the cost (so far as it had gone) of the Snake

bridge at Sentry Hill, and also the liabilities incurred by the Council in con-

nection with the latter bridge. The borough had also to adjust with the Clif-

ton County Council, 'and the clerk of that body asked for a copy of the Taranaki adjustment so that he could frame his statement accordingly. Defendant wrote to the Taranaki County clerk (Mr Mills) for a copy, but he replied that the Council preferred not to let the papers out of its possession. He stated that the result of the conference was that the borough should make, a cash payment to the County, and be relieved of liability for the rate. Mr Roy objected to any evidence about an agreement or balance-sheet that could not be produced. The H.U. upheld the objection. The

defendant said that the County Council had not been able to produce the bal-ance-sheet. That would have been the principal evidence for the defence, but it had been lost.

Mr Eoy submitted that at the date mentioned there was no power to make any adjustment as alleged. That power was only given last year in section 7 of the Local Bodies Loans Amendment Act, 1000. If any agreement had been arrived at it was valueless.

The defendant: And if they do wrong we have to suffer.

The S.M. said he had no evidence that tlie agreement, if made, had ever been signed. To Mr Roy: Defendant said that the

balance-sheet drawn at that time set out the amount of bridge loan for which the Waitara borough was liable. He knew of no signed copy of the schedule. This was the case for the defence. Mr Itoy contended that the defendant was debarred hy section 50 of the Eating Act from raising any objection to the validity of the rate. He was debarred, too, even if the document had been completed as alleged, for there was, no power to make it. The Magistrate said lie had already ruled that where a ratepayer urged a general objection to a rate, as though in a test case, the proper procedure was to make application to the. Supremo Court for an order to quash the rate. It was competent for a ratepayer to urge in his own defence that he was not an occupier, or not within the area, as a personal defence. But he could not

in this Court urge the general objections of this defendant. Mr Roy's contention as to the validity of any agreement was sound. And there was no

proof that any agreement had ever been arrived at by the local bodies concerned, passed, and given under their seals. Judgment would be for the plaintiff for the amount claimed, 4s 4d, and Os costs.

The remaining cases went by default: Versus Thos. Drynan, claim 2s 2d; v. Herbert Joll, claim 4s 4d; v. E. Beckbessinger, claim 3s 7d; costs 5s being allowed in each instance.