RESPONSIBILITY OF THE RAILWAY DEPARTMENT.

Waikato Times, Volume XX, Issue 1659, 22 February 1883, Page 2

RESPONSIBILITY OF THE RAILWAY DEPARTMENT.

•tt 5 — i — ■> ) •■, TO THE EDITOR. ' Sm. — I see some remarks iv your issue J of the 15th re damages ~snstrin?d by sparks &c. from the locomotives on| then line of railway. , I Jfave a /case in point also. About three years ago a 3park from the engine set fire ,to r *-and, burned, the greater part of 100 acres of grass of mine, then about a foot long. I thought it no u?e in applying for redress, as I well know the .vulo of the Railway" Department is to ' pay jnof hing until !compelled by law 1 , and' as v tne Department means jfche .Government, it is not much use ilii going 'tOflaAj/. , with; scj strong a power. But, sir, I have now a case'inore glaringly dishonest than an accident from Hie, uz., the Department brings a largo quantity of water down $\\% railway ditches for about four miles back | from Ohau'p'6'; this water passes through a culvert and down a drain which, was made when the railway 'was being, con-| structcd, to a lake at the lowpr end of about 100 acres of mine. < Tho .drain has^ never been cleaned out since it, was made, and last winter ty was completely 'filled rip a little* below 'the- oiWvteVt. , Thei water was then turned out of its cpurs« over this ground where >I sowed! £70 worth of grass and clover seed, , completely destroying it, as ,the grass perished from being 'under "water all winter, j' I "wrote ;, to,, the/ Minister of Public Works laying my damages at £200 for grass and, clover seed and lpss of grass, Ho said he 'would see it looked to, and sent a gentleman to inspect it, and the reply I have just received is this :—": — " The Government will not undertake to kuop the drain iv question clean, nor does it entertain the question of any liability." ' Now, sir, must I keep 30 chains of a 12 foot wide drain clean for the sole use of the railway, or will the 1 law allow the Department, after cutting a dr.vin through your property to carry water to a place of deposit where they wish to get rid of it, to refuse to keep the same open so that it will not overflow the property through which it passes ? It is very hard, nor do I, consider it just, that I should be compelled to 'keep this drain opened <fbr 'their sole use. ' I have written to our member upon the case asking his advice, as I mean to sue for £200 damages if there is law 'for it. Surely theic is fepnic law to protect people's property from unscrupulous, and I mjght add, dishonest and powerful companies who act upon the principle of " might is light." Excuse the length of' this letter, but as it b a question which must be sot \ ight and a very important question to some parties on the railway line, I could hardly bring it before yon in a shorter foi'm. — I am, &c, James Harpkr. ' ' ' • Ohaupo, 17th Feb., ISB3. '• P.S.— ln my letter to the Minister of Public Woiks, I said if theyi would ' keep the dram open in future, I would forego' the loss I have sustained.