WARDEN'S COURT.

Cromwell Argus, Volume V, Issue 249, 18 August 1874, Page 5

WARDEN'S COURT.

Friday, August 14, 1874. (Before, W.Lawrence Simpson, Esq., Warden.)

Protection.—< 'barles M'Kenna, CO days' for claim in Builey's gully : granted. Extended Claims.—G. Manson and another, two acres on Doctor's flat: granted.—Edward M '.Nulty and three others, four acres, Roaring Meg fla : refused, three of applicants having no miners' rights at the time of marking, and in the opinion of the Warden, too sharp practice having been used —John Hayes and three others, four acres, Roaring Meg flat: objected to by M'Nulty and party, and granted less the extent of '.he area of one ordinary claim at which end M'Nulty may choose.—T. M'Nulty and six others, six acres, above Roaring Meg flat: granted.

Tail Races. — Ah Pong, from claim at Nevis : granted. Water Races.— John Barr and another, from Bammckburn Co.'s race at Baunockburn. The Warden asked for the consent of the Bannockburn Water Race Company. Mr Colclough, as manager, said the application was with ..heir concurrence. The Warden said he would like an expression of it iu writing ; thee wns no saving when the company might go back on it else. Several residents of Quartzville, through whose property the race was to pass, objected that they had not been served with notice ; and the application was adjourned for fourteen days, so that notices maybe properly served.—George Manson, from Pipeclay gully: objected to by M 'Kersie and others, and adjourned for Warden to visit ground.

Dam.— Thomas M : Nulty, on Roaring Meg flat: objected to by Hayes and others, as ground already granted for a claim, and refused.

Diversion of Hirer. —Ah Fong, Nevis: grante-T. Resilience Area. — John Park, one acre in Pipeclay gully : adjourned, Warden to see ground.

Saturday, August 15, 1874. complaints.

Ah Gow and others v. A. Ritchie.—Claim of £3O. for interference with a dam by opening the flood gale and running ihe water to waste. Mr Cowan appeared for plaintiffs, and Mr Ritchie conducted his own case.

Three ' 'hine^e, —members of the party,—were examined by fbe interpreter, Mr John Ah Loo. Their evidence was to the effect that Ritchie, on the morning of the 3rd instant, opened the flood-gate, and ran off their water. They did not attempt to prove any motive whatever on li'S part for such a proceeding. Regarding the question of damage, their evidence was rather contradictory! They all agreed that they were stopped fvom working fir three days iu consequence, but while one of them said they made from £2O f .o £3O a week out of their ground, an 'thnr sti 1 they made an ounce a day, or six ounces a week ; and no amount of coss-ques-tioning could alter his statement. They borrowed the dam, tor the purpose of storing the water they rented, from Mr David Stewart, or "Tooat Divvy" as one of the Chinamen called him.

The evidence, of Ritchie was to the effect that he also received permission to use the same dam. The Chinese had half a head of water ; he had a whole nne. On the night previous to his letting off the water as alleged, the Chinamen's racn hid brok.-n away, and he simply turned on his

own water into his own claim. For this, the Chinamen had thrcatoncd him with picks and shovels, and afterwards laid the action. Regarding the amount of the Chinese earnings, their first washing-up, as he was told by one of the party, yielded only 225. 6d. for a week's work for the four men ; and this he believed was all the ground would yield. The case was dismissed with costs of Court and witnesses' expenses. Dagg and others v. Goodger and party.—Claim for breach of agreement. Mr Cowan for plaintiffs ; Mr Wilson for defendants. Mr Wilson, on being asked to plead, pleaded non-joinder of one of the party of defendants, Lars Petersen. Mr Cowan, after Borne argument, asked for leave to insert Petersen's name in the summons. The Warden allowed the amendment, and Mr Wilson then stated that he did not appear for Petersen, who was unrepresented and unserved. The case was therefore adjourned to allow of service of summons on the new defendant. Goodger v. Thomas.—ln this case the Warden now gave judgment. The case had been brought in order to enforce confiscation, and in such cases he would always give the benefit of any doubt to the defendants. He reviewed the evidence at length. O'Neill's evidence was the only real evidence produced in support of the •case for the complainauts ; and even as regarded the time he swore the water was running to waste, the evidence was in favour of the defendants having used it. Plaintiffs had insinuated that a certain break in Wet Gully was wilfully made, but there was no evidence brought forward in proof of this insinuation. He was of opinion that plaintiffs had failed to prove their case, and must therefore give judgment for the defendants. Some conversation took place as to rehearing, fresh evidence regarding the break being said to have been obtained. Mr Wilson asked for expenses for defendants. Mr Cowan strongly opposed. The Warden granted £4.