WARDEN’S COURT, ALEXANDRA.

Dunstan Times, Issue 792, 22 June 1877, Page 3

WARDEN’S COURT, ALEXANDRA.

—o—'Monday, June 18th, 1877. ‘(Before W. L.-Simpson, Esq., Warden.) G. Cameron v. W. Bailey. —This was an action to' compel defendant to allow the name of plaintiff to he placed on a certificate of water race, alleged by the plaintiff to he partly his property by purchase from the defendant. Mr Finn, for defendant, pleaded a general denial, the Statute of Frauds, and at a later stage of the proceedings "WAtt of jurisdiction. Mr. F. J. 'Wilson for'plaintiff, who, after briefly stating tho case, called on the plaintiff, whose evidence at some length was taken, which went to prove that a mining partnership was entered into between the parties in March, 18715, for the purpose of Working a mining claim at Doctor’s Point, represented by the defendant to yield LlO per week. A condition was made by the defendant at the'time‘df entering into partnership to the effect (hat if the claim paid LlO per week the plaintiff was to he entitled to a half-share in a water-race held by defendant, on payment of LI 5 ; or, if tho yield was nhtldO per week, the defendant was to have (he gross proceeds of the claim of two weeks, in consideration of liim transferring a half-share dt the face to plaintiff. To this'condition the plaintiff agreed, and the partnership was entered into. Plaintiff further stated that the claim anti waterrace was worked by tho partnership, assisted by hired men whose wages were paid out of the yield of the claim until Christinas of 1876, when a general settlement of accounts to date was made ; that at the time of settlement plaintiff offered defendant the sum of Lls ; 'anil that on several occasions he had offered tho money, hut which defendant under one pretext or other always refused. That since Christmas it hall been necessary to apply for a certificate for an alteration of the race, on which defendant refused any other name than his own to appear, and in consequence of this he (the plaintiff), fearing that he might ’lose his interest in the race instituted the present suit. J. C. Chappie, Thomas Hill, and Martin Calaghan also gave evidence in support of that of plaintiff. This closed plaintiff’s case, when Mr Finn contended, besides a cenoral denial of the statements of plaintiff and his witnesses, that tho plaintiff had no action, as by the Statute of Frauds laid it down that all contracts in reference to land whore no writing existed no action could be ; finally, that the Court had no jurisdiction, as there was no clause 'under the Administration of Justice Act that allowed the Warden to (leal with the Case as brought., Mr Wilson, in reply, said Where possession of land had been given as in this case, the Statute of Frauds did not apply, and in support of his argument cited judgment by Judge Gray in the District Court, Clyde. W. Bail'ey, sworn, said : There was no such agreement chtfcred into as stated by plaintiff, and that he merely gave plaintiff the use of tho water ier the trouble of helping to put and keep the race in order. He also stated that the statements of plaintiff and’his'Witnesses were untrue iff eVtry particular. The Warden, in giving judgment, Said ho was perfectly certain that ah arrangement j had been entered into as stated by tho plaintiff, hut he failed to see that lie had: jurisdiction. Ho must dismiss the case without Costs.