THE CARRINGTON ESTATE.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXI, Issue 9059, 19 February 1908, Page 5

THE CARRINGTON ESTATE.

ACQUISITION BY THE GOVERNMENT.

QUESTION OF COMPENSATION. The hearing of claims arising out of the compulsory acquisition by the Government under the Landrf for Settlement Act, of the Carrington Estate, containing 6,178 acres, and situated near Carterton, was begun before a Compensation Court consisting of the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout, and Messrs J. McKerrow (assessor for the Government), and H. R. Bunny (assessor for the claimant), at Wellington on Monday.^ Mr Skerrett, K.C., (with him Mr Johnston) appeared on hehalf of the owner of the fee simple (Mr William Howard Booth, of Carterton) Mr X>. M Findlay renresented the Miniate? for Lands. It was decided to hear !Vtr Booth's claim fivst^ The statement of cl&iffl set forth ->t the claimant wa3 the owner of it!*" £ simple subject to mortgages Booth, of srz wicio?, of £300; Mrs Alice C;!«on Wickham, of Waitara, £100; Miss Ka\ e "® , eth Rathbone, formerly of Cart 6i r oui?; now residing in England spinster, £120; and a lease containing rights of cutting timber and firewood and tramway privileges vested in the Public Trustee as executor and trustee of the late Wiliam Booth. Claimant assessed the value of the estate, including all buildings, erections, and improvements, but excluding the claim made by the Public Trustee in respect of timber and tramway rights, at £70.000, and the incidental losses at £9,600. The classification of the estate by the claimant was as follows: —First class land 506 acres; second class land the balance of the estate viz. 5,672 acres. Originally claimant claimed 1,400 acres by ..disputing the Government's classification and making the land second class instead of first. Mr - Skerrett intimated that he would accept the Government s classification of the land as first class land and elected to take a block of 988 acres upon which are situated the homestead buildings.

Mr Findlay resisted the claim on the ground that the reservation would be detrimental to the estate also because claimant had not complied with Section 109 of the Land Act.

. After a long discussion the Court awarded claimant the block he had elected to take.

Mr Skerrett, in opening the case for the claimant said that the value of the estate was to be assessed as from June 19th, 1906, the date on which the property was <;ompulsorily taken. The estate consisted of 6178 acres of which 2652 acres are flat and the balance undulating and hilly country. It was admirably adapted for small settlement. It was taken at the present juncture only because the Crown feared it would greatly increase in value within the nayt year or two. The property was divided conveniently into two blocks, one containing 2,046 acre", and the other 4,132 acres. The first-men-tioned block was flat,with the exception of 121 acres, which th« Government themselves had classified as first-class land. Claimant had been under a disadvantage through the asessors having, to go over the property after such a dry spell, as it was very difficult for anyone to put a fair value on a property under those conditions. The estate had been carried cn as a sheep farm. All the fences were in excellent condition, , excepting where breaches had been made by recent fires. As a matter of fact "the fires had done good, but the matter did not concern the claimant, as the fires had occurred subsequent to the acquisition of the property by the Government. Each year fifty acres had been cropped. The percentage of lambs at docking was 100 per cent, and the deaths Upon a winter carrying capacity of 5,500 had been 100 in 1906, and 120 in 1907. The claimant badj been in possession since the death of his father. The profit for the first year, after allowing for graduated tax, cost of fences, interest on stock and implements at 6 per cent, insurance, etc., had amounted to £3,118 7s, which, if capitalised at 5 per cent., would amount toj .€60,000, to which the Court must add the value of the bush and the land leased. The claimant's valuations of the whole property without buildings, ranged from £62,000 to £67,000. Claimant proposed to remain in possession until March next year. If the Grown

insisted on claimant giving up possession at an earlier date, a much

larger sum would be claimed for disturbance.

E. Eagle, farmer, of Belvedere, assessed the value of the portion of the estate which had been awarded to claimant (buildings excepted) at £19,953 10s, and the balance of the estate at £42,142 10s. G. Stevens, farmer,of Belvedere, stated that in his opinion the estate (with the exception of the portion awarded to claimant) was worth £41,301 10s. C. Morgan, dairy farmer, of Carterton, gave detailed valuations, which substantially agreed with those of the previous witness. G. Wilmhurst, farmer, of Taratahi, assessed the value of the land taken at £42,997. G. W. Deller, run-holder, of Carterton, considered the land retained was' worth £19,876 15s, and the land taken £44,047. •J. McDonald, manager of the estate, stated that the value of the area which had been awarded to claimant was valued] by him at £18,349.

AN AWARD OF £39,155.

BY TELEGUAriI—I'RESS ASSOCIATION. WELLINGTON, February 18

The Compensation Court was further occupied to-day in hearing the claim broucht against the Government by William Howard Booth in respect to the Carrington Estate. After hearing the evidence and counsels addresses the Court having retired for a short while to consider their decision, the Chief Justice announced that they had decided to award the claimant the sum of £39,155. They had also allowed a certain amount for disturbance, and also for costs. They understood that the land was to'be given up on March 15th, 1909. He had allowed an assessors' fee of seven guineas per day each, each party to pay its own assessor.

Another c'aim arising out of the acquisition of the same estate was then proceeded with, that of the Public Trustee, as executor and trustee to the late W. H. Booth in respect to certain tramway and timber rights. The assessors in this case were Messrs Stevens (for the Public Trustee) and McKerrow (for the Go»ernment). The Minister of Lands was again represented by Mr D. M. Findlay, Mr Myers appearing for the Public Trustee. Mr Myers said that the only item now in dispute was the question of comnensation for firewood, and the timber, piles and posts. The claim was for £1,290. As to the other items an arrangement had been eun rived at which would be embodied in the award of the Court. They retail A the tramway yighta for flvQ years*' and with ronaont Ifl ' jiu.j to the tramway. _ hearing an amount of expert r as to the timber of various sorts still on the estate and the facility or otherwise with which it could be reached and cut out, the hearing was adjourned until the following morning.