DISTRICT COURT, CLYDE.

Dunstan Times, Issue 638, 10 July 1874, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT, CLYDE.

In Appeal. —Feraud, appellant, vHolt, RESPONDENT. His Honor Judge Gray sat some part of the week before last, and sat again by adjournment, on his return from Queenstown, hearing the above ease. At the close of the case, on Monday last, he reserved his judgment and stated that so many serious questions had been raised in the case that

he would probably not give final judgment without stating a caau -for tliw otipiemu Court. His Honor pointed out the difficulties of some of these questions, and particularly as affecting tho supply of water to towns upon the Gold-fields. Mr Feraud sought to have Holt’s water-right forfeited on the ground that he was not using the water for Gold-fields purposes. The water was used by Mr Holt, firstly, in part for the town supply of Clyde, and incidentally along with this fur the irrigation of some town and suburban gardens ; and secondly, alter tho water had reached a level lower than the town of Clyde, Mr Holt used it for working his coal pit. MrFcraud contended that this was a use of tho Water • which, looking to the purposes contemi plated by the Gold-fields licenses, was in | effect a total non-user of it, and as such I subjected Mr Holt to a forfeiture under j Section of Regulation • For Mr 1 Holt, it was contended by his counsel, ' Mr Wilson, that the supplying of water j for domestic purposes to Gold-field towns was within the purview of the license, especially if tho town included among its inhabitants holders of miner's rights. ! It was made a subject of much discussion that the town of Clyde had been withdrawn from the Gold-fields, and on this ground points were made upon both sides, Mr Feraud, who appeared in person, contending that the supplying of a town not within the Gold-fields enuld not bo a legitimate use of the water under tho Goldfields Act ; Mr Wilson, for Mr Holt, raising a strong point that, as the race bad its termination within the town, and so outside of the Gold-fields, which were the limit of the Warden’s jurisdiction, the i Warden had no jurisdiction to declare it ! forfeited. His Honor sai 1, in relation to I those and other questions laised in the I case, that they seriously affected .the title ' on which roost of the Gold-fields towns j held their water supply, and he could not j decide thorn without giving them a goo 1 ' deal of consideration. He would probably think it desirable to reserve some points for the opinion of the Supreme Court. This might occasion more delay than tho parties (especially Mr Feraud, the complainant) would like ; but tho use made of the water had been allowed to rest nnqueslioned in the Courts, though much debated outside, for nearly or quite ton years, and tho i matter could afford the delay that might now be necessary for procuring a deliberate ■ and authoritative decision of it. j [His Honor will probably give his own , opinion upon tho ease more in detail before : it is submitted for the opinion of the Supreme Chuvt. Should ho do so, we will endeavor to present our readers with at least a careful abstract of his views ]