Image TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage Tile
Image size: 6144x7680 Scale: 35% - PanoJS3
Page overview thumbnail

Article text

JUSTICE AT COLLINGWOOD.
to ins editor of the age.
Sir,— As a constant reader of your valuable
paper for twenty years, and cover before having
asked a favor, perhaps you will pardon me for
now asking yonr valuable assistance in ex
posing a groat wroug done to small pro
perty holders at Collingwood, by tho muni-
cipal council, in compelling ratepayers to pay
foi the making of public roads under
tbo pretence tbat tbey are private roads.
Little Charles-street was laid out in 1850. Col
lingwood was proclaimed a municipal district
24th April, 1855, under tbe ISth Victoria, No.
15, and by tbis act all roads then in existence
(24th April, 1855), became tho property of the
municipal council by tho proclamation
of tbe Govcrnor-in-Council, irrespective of
width, no excoption being made. The
council, about tbe year I860, caused
about eight chains of the street in question to he
formed, kerbed, metalled and channelled, and
paid for tho same out of tbe general rates of tho
district; also erected a public street lamp,
which has been regularly lighted out of
tbe borough funds for twelve years, and af
fixed tkeir sign plate, Littlo Charles-street, upon
it. Now, forsooth, thoy repudiate its being
a public etreet, and demand the rate
payers abutting thereon to pay for the making of
tlie remainder of tbo unmade portion, I, along,
.with others, was summoned to tbe Collingwood
Conrt of Petty Sessions, and ordered to pay tho
amount claimed with costs, having defended .the
case on the ground that tue street abovenamed
was a public street under the net. 1 then ap
pealed to tbo Supremo Court, and a verdict was
returned in my favor, with costs. There
was no evidonce to show that the street
was private, therefore their Honors the
judges held it to be a public street.
Tbe caso above came before the Supreme Court
on 2Stk June, 1875. Yet, in the face of all tbis,
tbo municipal council summon me again upon tbe
same case that the judges, as above decided I
liadl no right to pay. I am therefore obliged
by tueir action to neglect my work for four dif
ferent days, tbo case being argued three times.
1 am ordered to pay the demand again,
with twenty-one shillings costs, and that
on tho ground that the council lind not
fizetted Little Charles-street as a public street,
produced as evidcnco the proclamation in tbe
Government Gazette, also the act under which it
was proclaimed, and tho plan of Collingwood in
1856, also a copy of prohibition order, all of which
went to show Little Cbarles-streottobo public ; and
notwithstanding the above Supreme Court deci
sion, they (the magistrates), Mr. Templeton and
others, gave a verdict in favor of the council.
I should think, Sir, tbat the council have no dis
cretionary power to say which shall he public or
private streets ; and further, this is one of the
streets thnt was included in tbe Drainage and
Improvement Bill, for which a loan was obtained,
and for which wo have been paying a special rate
of eight pence in tbe pound for eight or nine
years to have these improvements made, and this
street wns lowered two feet to intersect Lang-
ridge-street ; and yet, after paying rates for
twenty years, we are told that we shall have
to pay for tbe making of a public street, in addi
tion to paying rates. Surely the Government
should interfere and put a stop to the Municipal
Council of Collingwood doing a griovous wrong
to poor, Jiard-working men, that find it quite
enough to have to pay a one shilling nnd tenpence
rate, without paying for the making of tbe public
roads also.— Yours, &c.,
THOMAS EMMETT.
Nicholson-street, Collingwood.
$