RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Thames Star, Volume X, Issue 3365, 4 October 1879, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

THIS DAY. (Before H. Kenriok. Esq., R.M.) MOVING A SUUVEY TEG. Michael Driscoll was elinrged, on the information of Ales. Aitken, surveyor, with having raovpd a survey peg at Hape Creek. Defendant, who was represented by Mr Brassey, pleaded not guilty. Mr Miller appeared for the pross cutiop, and briefly stated die ease, which he said was laid und^r tbc 72ml section ot " The Public Works Act." .Defendant was a contractor for a road at Hope Creek," and bad moved a peg, thereby curtailing the amount of work required to be done.. Many complaints had been made of ibis Itind of thing, bufc this had beeu tho first case detected. Alex. Aitkeu, swovn, deposed—l nm tbe informant in this case, and am surveyor to the Thames County Council, and have been so since its formation. As such surveyor, some time ago I had occasion to mark out a roa^ at Hape creek, within the County of Thames. T put in some pegs. (At this pointwitnesses were ordered out of Court). This was about tire'end of August last. A contract for tho work was let, and Mr Driscoll's tender was accepted. He pro ceeded to go on with the work. There was no necessity to move any of the pees, and it is always the ensfom to leave the 'paws in position to show when the work is-done, I recognise theposif ion of the pegs j on the plan produced The pecj marked is not in the position I placed it. It has j been moved about 2| feet. I know its position by a faSlen-in drive. The altering of its position affected a saving in the quantity of earth to be removed. The road was to be cot 14 feet inside of the pee, and by the alteration fire feet of cutting was saved. The line of the peg was only on the low side of the road. I did not sanction the removal of the peg. John Barron, the Foreman of Worlcs, drove in the peg. I noticed that the peg had been shifted a week before I received positive information of the removal of the peg marked A. By Mr Brassey—Mr Allen gave me j tbe information. The Foreman of Vt orks did not report to me the shifting of the peg. John- Barron, County Foreman of Works, gave corroborative evidence. William Allen, a miner living Grahams- I town, sworn, deposed—l have been working for Driscoll on the Hape Creek road I contract. The lower line of the road wa9 j marked out on one side by pegs I know a particular peg near an old drive. It has been moved since work commenced. I saw this peg being moved by Driscoll. It was shifted about a yard. This was about four weeks ago. Driscoll said nothing when he was moving the peg. The benefit of shifting the peg was it saved cutting in the high ground. In cross-examination, Mr Brassey elicited that witness and Driscoll had had a row. A man named Sogan had been with him when Driscoll shifted the peg.

Owen Brislin deposed that he had seen Driscoll moving the peg-

This concluded the case for prosecution, and Mr Brassey addressed the Court for the defence, and called

Michael Driscoll, who swore positively that he had never removed the peg, and that the evidence re the removal of the peg was false, and the peg was now in its original position. W. Hetherington and Francis? Brogan gave evidence to the effect that they had not seen the peg removed, and that Allen bad used endeavors to induce them to swear fal«ely. His Worship then summed up at considerable length. He was "of opinion that the peg had been moved by defendant, but was not certain that be could be punished •under the section of the Act under which the charge was laid. The question was— Were these pegs survey pegs, or simply pegs put in to mark the line of road for tha contractors guidance ? He would hold over his decision till Monday. Court adjourned.