R.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume VI, Issue 1871, 22 December 1884, Page 2

R.M. COURT.

MASTERTON.-THIS DAY.

Before H. 5. '! Beethaji, and. J,. Ajies-.'J.PV ~y,[. J" James Day v Lftflf' : '' : Compensation for loffiTof)^ ft fJ-" ' damages sustained by railway line • cutting • plaintiff off from wood and water. Mr Beard appeared for the- ■"' plaintiff and Mr Izard foe,; the crown. " The value conceded by the Government valuer, Mr Dreyer, Ms L250.V..Thomas Brown, farnieiy gave * evidence as to the extent of damage ' caused to plaintiffs property;.':by the construction of the line. He Valued : the land taken at LlO per acre. He had received himself LI 5 an acre for some land taken for railway construction.

Mr Izard,. " Was this all that your land was worth'.'"

Witness: I do suppose so or I should not have got it. (A. laiii»h.) Mr Izard: The piece taken from you cut you off from the main road? Witness: Yes. i . Mr Izard: If the bush were cleared away from tlio land taken from Mr '' Day would it not be in danger of being out away by the river.- , .^*-• ■ f Witness: It might be. '™ - R. ; Campbell, farmer, called, deposed that ten acres of Mr Day's land by „ the bridge were now useless, as they were cut off by tne railway from high i •land, and sheep placed, on them, would,;be liable to be washed away. ~ Brown Hunt valued the land' taken by trie railway (fiacres) at LIS per '"' : . The greater part of itwasgOod alluvial soil and good firewood—enough firewood to keep two fires burning for 15 or 20 years. The rest of the land was cut. off from the. water by the railway.. "He estimated cutting off the . water frontage would deteriorate the property LSOO. ■•:■

William Buick- valued -the;., land ••" taken at L2O an acre to the man' owning the adjoining property \ ; as' it • contained the only bit;,- of bush there was| ; 'and : ifc;Was";the only - flat land in the,blook, "Two ten;acre-' .- lots were rendered' valuplesgVby ,'■■'. cut off from the 26' acres taken by Gcjlr' yemraent,.; Th'e water, frontage taken offlhe.property lie estimated ''■■■''...':. causqd a depreciation-of over;'a-huiidred •. V pounds. In fact, he would rioVbu'y •':.'.. that property without the' ..water -v frontage. • . ,'-. • ■ ; ; . ' . This : concluded' the case tor- the:-• plaintiff; .',.'..''

Mr Izard said he did ' '. for the; purpose of resisting ar.y fair ""' airount of damages, buthetlid not adnn& • : ■ for a moment, the claim set up-.b* ..„', plaintiff. : The witnesses had valued the land from LlO to L2O and Hia'v Worship had seen the land and knew ' that no amount of imagination would bring the value of the land up to that amount. Th 626 acres had been.dwelt; / .■■■, upon as containing good bush for fire V purposes, .but if the bush was'cnfdown there would be nothing to f stop . the laad being washed away. He would . call witnesses who put a different complexion upon the value of it, The water frontage had been made a great deal of, but Mr Day was in preoiaely " the same position .now as he wag& before the railway was put there, and* • why he should come now and claim compensation LI per acre he did' not understand. : > He called his first witness, !

A, S. Dreyer, who deposed he knew the land in question and'valued the:' 26 acres at LB, and afterwards seeing he would be put to certain inconveniences he included that coniideration and increased it to LlO, exclusive of the ditch.. This sum was fair, arid' more than fair value. The whole of. the land was assessed at L 3 5s per acre by him, and Mr Day thought that that valuation at'time, excessive,

By Mr Beard: Plaintiff will be supplied with gates at the railway crossing to get to the water. He did not consider he was damaged to a « greater extent than L 25 by being cut ofi from, the water in that direction aa

be other access. He hail included this with his estimate aILIO per acre. Joseph lorns vuliml the 2G acres at L 7 an acreiiml the iiush on it at LSO totho )ilaintiff. This ■ was value including severance. By Sflr Beard : He did not consider the detached land, 10 acres, of any great value, Ho did not consider sheep Quired water except in the dry season as' they had heavy dews. They also had access to the river at another point, He considered there was ten years' Supply of firewood at L 5 a yrnr. Judgment was given for plaintiff for L 333, tlie Government agreeing to give fc( plaintiff two crossings and cattle stop. 1 to connect his land, each party to pn\ their own costs, A case against Randolph Lawreni for.tl)e larcency of four lings.'was «yd on but in the absence of materia; wttnesses wan adjourned till tin: \ afternoon,