WARDEN’S COURT, CLYDE

Dunstan Times, Issue 477, 9 June 1871, Page 2

WARDEN’S COURT, CLYDE

Tuesday, June 6. (Before Mr. Warden Pyke.) Feraud v. Holt.—Claim for £2OO damages. This case had been adjourned from the previous Tuesday for the decision of the Warden, and was further adjourned till Friday the 9th hist. Robert M'Morran was informed against by theßanger of the commonagofor depasture cattlo without a license; The case was ad journed for a week to allow the defendaat an opportunity of appealing. Feraud and others v. Ilolt—ln this suit the plaintiffs alleged : 1. That defendant obtained a conditional right lo divert water out of the W ai Keri Creek for coi tain purposes, the ultimate use to which the said

Nvater was to 1)0 applied l)eing for gold- \ mining; 2. That the defendant has not for the last five or six years, nor does he Viow use the said water*f6r gold-mining purposes ; but has rented the same, r r a part Ihe 'eof to the inhabitants of Clyde for the qurprse of irrigating their gardens, to the serious injury of complainants as agricultural leaseholders in theWai Keri Valley. 3. That claims on the river beach where very rich gold has been found cannot be worked in consequence of the whole of the watei. being taken up by the defendant. Wherefore the complainants cla ihed that the defendant’s said water licence be cancelled. Messrs. Hanlon, Wilson, and M‘Arthur had sent in noticoi thirf.tlrOy withdrew from'the suit. Mr. Brough maintained that the notices were insufficient. If judgment went against the plaintiffs the fact of tinir sendf jug iu the notices would not exonerate them r from their liability for costs. M Arthur had since notified that he would join in the suit. The Warden said, he coup! not force the parties to prosecute the suit. lire . Regulations did not provide for such a contingency, and it had not arisen befor . the plaint wanted amendment. Mr. Brough offered to amend the plaint. Mr. Wilson said that the parties were hot partners, consequently there would he a nonsuit on the ground of misjoinder. He suggested that Foraud should enter an action in his own name. Mr. Brough stated that his client did not wish to force any one to join him nr the suit. Ho would strike out all the names ■except Feraud’s. The amendment was agreed to, and all the names exceptVeraud s were struck out. Mr. AVilson took objoction to the jurisdiction of the Court. By 'the 26th Section of the Goldfields Act, which he quoted, he contended that no one but the Governor could resume a waterright when once granted. Mr. Brough said that Judge Grey had held that the clause quoted hy Mr. Wilson did not apply to the q/resent case. The Warden had no objection to refer the case to the District Court, under Section 7S, or he would give-his decision on Friday. Mr. AA'ilson objected to the AA r arVlen referring the case to the District Court, on the ground that he could not refer a matter over which he had no jurisdiction. The case was adjourned till the 9th instant, for the decision of the Warder on the question of jurisdiction : grosts of the day to he costs in the suit. Charles Holden aqrplied for an agvicubural lease of one hundred acres at Cooper’s Creek, ’i he graining of the anqdicatioit was objected to by Alexander M‘Leod and RobertAVatsorr, ■on tbe ground that the laud was auriferous. After hearing ’the evidence of the objectors, the AVarden adjourned the case for four weeks, stating that he would visit the ■ ground iu the meantime. Felix Fffisancliere applied for a dam. Ryan and qrarty, for whom Mr. Brough appeared, entered an objection, on the ground that app’icant had not qregged off tbe ground in accordance with the Regulations. The ■applicant admitted that he had marked the ground with trenches only. The objection was therefore sustained and the application refused.

Jamieson and Harding applied tor a dam on the west bank of the Molyneux. Mr. Brough, on behalf of Alexander and party, 'opposed the granting of the application, on the ground’ that the dam proposed to he ‘constructed was immediately in front of objectors’ dam and their race passed through the ground the dam Would occupy. Ihe application was refused, permission given to apply again if applicants constructed a race for Alexander and party in lieu of that already made. William Eyan and others applied for a dam on the west bank of the Molyneux. The applicants had a dam granted the previous week, and the site they now applied for was that refuse 1 to Faisandiorc and party. The Warden said it appeared as if applicants were endeavoring to monopolise the ground, and adjourned the application fop a fortnight. • An v extended claim was granted to Fell and party, on the east bank of the Molyneux. v

A lad,race and dam we granted to Daniel Anderson and throe others, in Hopeful Gully. An application for an extended claim in Hopeful Gully, by the same party, was adjourned, to allow it being advertised.