WARDEN'S COURT.

Cromwell Argus, Volume V, Issue 258, 8 September 1874, Page 6

WARDEN'S COURT.

Friday, September.4, 1874

(Before W. Lawrence Simpson, Esq., Warden, j

JUDGMENTS. Maher v. Goodger and others.—This was a case adjourned on the point as to whether a person coming into this Court must he a. possessor of a miner's right. The Warden said he had considered the point with <?reat closeness, and it was only with doubt that he now gave a decision. He must give it as. his opinion that a Warden could hold jurisdiction in cases only where both parties were possessors of miner's rights. He was willing, if such an agreement was come to by the parties in this suit, to state a case for the District Court. M r Cowan said he would rather take a direct judgment, and enter an action in another Court. The Warden therefore'gave judgment for the defendants, with 21s. professional costs. Dags and others v. Goodger and others.—Thi same point, as regarded three of the plaintiff;, had arisen in this case, which had been adjourn/d for a similar reason. Three of the plaintffs were properly in Court,—Herbert and Watmn, and A. Wood ; the three out of Court were Jfagg and Short, and Britten. He was of opnion that a. contract had been made between'complainants and defendants, regarding whfcr there had been a failure to a certain extent on the point 1 of the latter to carry it out. • H/.would give l judgment for the three plaintiffs pr/perly in Court, for £lO. and costs of Court. Mr flowm, on behalf of Wood, applied that the Warden might make a as Wood claimed to have done more work did suffered more loss than the two '*" ' . c

The Warden said it was a matte' entirely between themselves, and he could n* do anything nnless p.akorl to adjudicate.

i f THE, JPIPECLAY CASES. . .'; Re the application of Young andiparty, dciD a, tail-race: from their extended claim in Pipeclay Gullyj tyhich had been adjourned to allow pi the Wardlm visiting the ground, Mr .Simpson now gaMB a decision. He said one of the objecting parties, Brown and party, had sent him a, Jetter drawing attention to the" fact that, when thegully was declared a main tail-race, sluicing was not contemplate!. He hardly thought this waß correct. Any one could sluice into a sludge-channel without asking, any permission, and could only be stopped when they did damage. The miners in Pipeclay, when the channel was declared, bad it in their power to make regulations as to the manner of working in the gully, (and perhaps they had the power yet to do this); but they had not done so and-must put up with the consequences. . - Mr Crombie, as one of the objectors, said if such applications as the present were granted, great injury would be done to an interest that employed a great deal of labour and capital, and was a most important one. The Warden quoted the case of the residence area holders in Gabriel's Gully, Tuapeka. There there was constant litigation, and it was decided that such holders who held rights previous to the gully being declared a main tail-race,, had good grounds for damages. Sluicers in this case would have to look to it that no holders of tunnel claims held uncancelled certificates for their ground, granted before the declaration of the gully into a main tail-race. The best course he thought he could pursue was to refuse the application. Then sluicers could work at their risk; tunnel Owners could sue them if damage were sustained ; and thus the matter would probably find its. way into the District Court, and .be finally settled. He would then, as Warden, be called, on to interpret the rights in the gully, and to ascertain how many of them held an unbroken existence since before the declaration of the sludge-channel. .-, 4 ~ Mr Colclough stated that the applicants would prefer to withdraw their application. Leave was granted. : APPLICATIONS. . V

Protection. —Edward Tupker and others, 60 days' for quartz claim in Paddy's gully: granted. —H. Joblin and another, 90 days' for claim on B oaring Meg flat: granted.—John Wilkinson, 90.days' for claim on Meg flat. No appearance.

Extended Claims. —Sun Yow and.others, three acres in Smith's gully : refused.—Ah Taen'ancl three others, four acres near Stuart's ferry": granted^.—Se Toy and five others, six acres on Doctor's flat: granted.—James M'Nulty and another, two acres on Meg flat: cancelled.— Edwd. M'Nulty and another, two acres on Meg flat : granted.—Frederick Ohm, one acre, on Meg flat: granted.—John Beattie and another, two acres in Adam's gully : granted. t. Tail Baces.—George Cockburn, for coal lease : no power to deal with such an application. Tunnel. —George Walker, to claim in Pipeclay gully : "o appearance. , • Water Races. —Thomas Baird, extension/ and alteration of licensed water race : Barr and others, two sluiceheads from Goodger's race, at .Quartzville : granted.—-L. WUliara,sj>n and another, two sluiceheads from SteWatf; arid. Co.'s race: granted. J. M 'Nulty, two sluice': heads from Greenland creek: race sought for is proved abandoned, and notices are served.—James M'Nulty and six others, four sluiceheads from Kirtleburn : granted! V Dam. —Se Toy and five others, at Bannockburn : granted. ADJOURNED APPLICATIONS. Dam. —S. Graham, a-t Bannock burn : granted, applicant agreeing to remove dam without compensation when ground is required. - .Residence Area. — John Parte, Pipeclay gully : refused.