DISTRICT COURT, QUEENSTOWN.

Dunstan Times, Issue 801, 24 August 1877, Page 3

DISTRICT COURT, QUEENSTOWN.

Monday, August Rltli, 1577. j (Before His Honor Judge Harvey.) William Anderson, charged by Andrew 1 Ryan with unlawfully wounding and beat- c lug him with intent to commit grievous bodily harm, and with a common assault, 1 was tried before His Honor and a Jury of twelve, and found guilty of the latter offence. —Ho was sentenced to seven days’ imprisonment, without bard labor, in J Queenstown Caol. The ease appeared to bo a drunken row, one beating the other most unmercifully. —Mr Finn, for prisoner ; Air Johnson, for the Crown. Tuesday, August 14th. Holliday v. Warren.—This was a claim for 1.50, expenses incurred by plaintiff bv being wrongfully summoned to Queenstown instead of another man of the same name, for the payment of a newspaper and advertising account. The plaintiff could not show but a small amount of damage, but based his claim upon being made a fool of, having to go from Alaeetown to Queenstown for nothing, and being laughed at by bis friends.— His Honor ruled that such was not actionable. However, be bad no jnrisdistion in the case, as the question of | damages should have been settled by the j magistrate who heard the case. Nonsuited. —Air W. Tnrton, for plaintiff; Air Finn, i for defendant. '■ Charles Barnett and his wife Elizabeth 1 Barnett v. Richard Howarth —Claim for . LSI) 10s, money lent and paid on account of i defendant. This was a sort of a family | squabble over the settlement of some ao- ! counts. His Honor described it as a very ; painful case, but be could not, when the | evidence was so contradictory, say which ! j side told the truth ; evidently one side did i 1 not, and he would non suit the plaintiff.— ' Air Finn for plaintiff; Mr Tnrton, for dci fendant. | j Miller v. Barker. Action to recover T. 200 , i for false imprisonment. It appeared from ; | the evidence that defendant is Clerk of the ' j R.AL Court, Arrowtown, and the plaintiff! I was a prisoner in the gaol there, incarcerated ! i on a fraud summons. While confined he j filed his schedule, and demanded to he re leased. Defendant refused to issue the or- ! dec, as under the rules of the Imprisonment ! for Debt Act it is laid down that a person j so confined under a fraud summons cannot be released except by payment of the debt, 1 the order of the committing Magistrate, or i Judge of District Court. The two former I not being forthcoming, and the latter only being obtained eleven days after tbo filing, plaintiff suffered confinement for that term when he should have been liberated from the first. Now, the Act itself provides that a prisoner shall be discharged upon declaring himself insolvent, and the question is whether that the rules are not ultra vires with the Act, and whether the Covorno' had tlio power to make rules otherwise than for the administration of the Act. His Honor considered that some knotty points of law were involved, and reserved his decision .until the next sitting of the Court.— Mr Finn, for plaintiff ; Air Tnrton, for defendant. ’ Wkdnesday, August loth. Seott v. Hall and Tray nor.—Claim for the restoration of n mining certificate, cancelled by fraud and misrepresentation ; also for LIOO damages, or such relief as the Court might award.—Air Finn, for plaintiff; Air Johnson, for defendant. Air Finn, in opening the case, said— It was one of the greatest swindles ever perpetrated, and he would show that the defendant Hall, by collusion with Tray nor, bad edfrauded tbo plaintiff of a valuable share in a mining claim ; and would also prove that Hall, although only possessing from the first three shares had managed to sell live. 0. Barker, Clerk of tlio Court, Arrowtown, produced complaint by Hall and ■ others for dissolution of partnership as far . as regarded one Hoffmann, and that they . might bo awarded Hoffmann's interest. . Also complaint by Traynor, for a cancellation of certificate. Cross-examined by Air Johnson—Witi ness saw nothing on the certificate to dc- ; note that Scott was a shareholder, nor . was there anything in tbo Warden’s books. The certificate was cancelled on [ i the Ifith January last, according to the , j usual course. It lias been tbo practice of j Air Warden Simpson to direct verbally , that-a summons should be served npm a . I claim instead of personally. Thought there s j was a verbal direction in present ease so far as regards Hoffman. [ His Honor commented upon such a proI; cedurc, and thought tlio interests of do--1 fondants ought to be better looked after in t Warden's Courts. - James Scott, baker, residing at (bomf well, on being sW'.rn, deposed—That about j tbo Ist August, IS7(J, lie purchased a one- • sixth share in the Tipperary prospecting , claim from the defendant Hall, and re-

ceived a properly stamped transfer. Went t» Arrow hi September, when lio saw Hall, who told him Unit this claim was protected. Wont there again in November, when Midi said the claim was looking well, and asked 1 that a man named Traynor might ho pin - - j mitted to go to work with him for the Company. To this lie consented, and wont up to Maeetown with them, leaving them, as ho supposed, to goto work at the claim, I and telling Hall if he wanted any money to write to him at Cromwell. Hall wrote, asking for LIO, hut as he (plaintiff) heard i that Hall had arranged with some Chinese ' to work on terms he refused to send the money. I’laintiif came to Arrowtown again in April last, and went up with tip; other shareholders, Hall, Resta, and M‘Kay, to the claim. He asked Hall about tho cancellation, when Hall replied that he (plaintiff) was not to believe all he heard, it was all right, saying at tho same time that he would give that “poor devil” Hoffmann his share hack, ami would re turn him (plaintiff) his money if lie did not like his share, to which proposition he (plaintiff') declined. Returned to Cromwell and sent up his certificate of transfer to be registered. Hall refused to comply and he hoard that ho (Hall) wanted to get rid of him as a shareholder. He went up to Arrow, and saw Hall shortly afterwards, hut could get nothing from him, and was told to do his best. Replied to flail that ho would do so. Cross-examined by Mr Johnson—Before April heard that the certificate had been cancelled, but was not sure. Did not consider it necessary to register as ho had done him (Hall) several good turns. 1). M‘Kay deposed--Bought an interest of Hall in the Tipperary claim in October, 1870. Was not aware that Scott held a share, and did not give Hall instructions to sue for a dissolution of partnership. In December hist was summoned by Traynor for the cancellation of the certificate, which was effected on the Kith January, gave the ease up as a had one. Held the one-sixth interest first as a mortgage. Recollected seeing Resta at Arrowtown on the day of cancellation. Traynor gave him two shares in tlie new claim, Hall two, Resta one, and retained one for himself. Have since sold tho shares. A one-sixth share in the claim was sold a short time ago for 1/220. Cross-examined—'The present claim is a ■ portion of the old one. The money he adi vanced to Hall, he believed was to go provi ing tiro ground. | 'Thomas Hall, who was called as witness I for plaintiff was examined, when Mr Finn I objected to tho administration of the usual } oath as both Wardens Broad and Rcctham j | had refused to swear him. and would only | i accept his statement for what it was worth. ! ■ His Honor ordered him to bo sworn, when ; he deposed—At the beginning of June, 1 I ISTIi, himself and one Hoffman took up a I prospecting claim in Scanlon’s gully- tho | present “ Tipperary,” and obtained a Cor- I titicatcuumberedCl 15; he held 3 shares, and | j Hoffman three shares. Sold a share to j i plaintiff, but not to Mr Fergus, then Uis- ; ; evict Engineer. Sold a share to M ‘Kay, | and held one share until ejected by the cani collation. Brought a complaint for dissolu- i j tiou of partnership ; did not recognise Scott | 1 as lie had not registered his purchase ; had j i authority from M‘Kay to bring the suit, | but the Warden dismissed the case. Had I known Traynor 11 or 12 years. No work ; was done on tho claim, it was abandoned, j never wrote to Scott, might have told I M‘Kay that thejelaim was abandoned, never , told Resta, and did not see Hoffman. I j never told Traynor to peg off the claim, nor pointed it out to him. Traynor and himself lived close to each other half a mile from the claim. Was summoned by Traynor for the cancellation. “Was at the Arrow ‘j on the day of hearing. Never told Scott he was summoned. Saw Resta the same day at the Arrow. Did not defend tho action. The next evening, himself, Traynor, and a man named Barron pegged off the present claim, it is GDI) feet in length along tho course of the reef. Traynor offered 1 him two shares, held no interest in the 1 claim now, have sold out—one share for L‘2oo, the other for Lldl). "Was not aware there was such lieh stone when the Certificate was cancelled. Louis Resta deposed—Was a shareholder hi the “ Tipperary ” since July 1870. In ) October bad a conversation with Hall about ■ working tho claim. Hall said it was pro- * teetod. Offered to go to work himself or ; send his hi other when the protection had ■ expired. In December saw Hall again, who asked him to sign a paper for a dissolution - of partnership, he refused, when Hall told (Continued on fourth page.)

Lira tlmt he intended to jump Huffman’* shares as lio was a lazy man. Knew Hoffman was in Dilnedin, who was instructed to - negociate for machinery, and I said to Hall that it he was going to do any jumping, he witness would have nothing to do with it. Called ir.y brother to seo the paper, and ho refused to sign. 1 afterwards saw Trayuor, he said he had a summons for mo, as the ground in Scanlon’s gully was jumped, sny- , inghe might as well have it as any other (person. I i. tv if abandoned tl-e ground, and and always asking Hall to put a man on. When the Chinese went to work took out a ■prospect, and washed nearly half an ounce to the dish. Told Hall a-short time after the cancellation to knock off the Chinese! When Tray nor gave him the summons, he -said lie supposed witness would be down ; he went to the Arrow and took a witness. Tray nor -said ho was not going to jump my ground. M ‘Kay asked if 1 had a miner’s right, gave my miner’s right to M 'Kay, •and went home as my wife was ill—always thought my original share was all right. Antonio Resta, brother to the last witcss, gave corroborative evidence. Henry JohuCopo deposed—-Was a mining Manager, residing at Alaeetowu, knew the “ Tipperary ” claim, there were large blocks of quartz on the surface when the roof was 'first found there was gold in the quartz and ■mulloch. Saw Seott, Hall and Trayuor at Maeetowu in November last, believed Hall and Tray nor were-going to the Tipperary reef. Saw Scott again in April or May, Scott and Hall came to his, (witness) house to arrange about exchanging a share in the Advance Peak reef for one in the Tipperary; advised Scott not to exchange on the terms offered by (Hall ; Hall 'told Scott lie held no share, and might do Jiis best, and Scott said he would do so. Cross-examined—Heard that Scott had ■arranged to let a man named l)agg have an intesest if he would go to work on the Tiporary, and 'heard ifikat Dang had refused to go to work— Dagg was one of the jumpers in Hie “ Premier ” ground. G. B. Douglas, Engineer, deposed—Knew the Tipperary claim, was shown it by the last witness in September, IS7C—Took a piece of the stone and got gold, and marked out an adjoining claim. This concluded the ■case for the plaintiff - . ’Owen Trayuor, deposed—Had been mining in Wakatip for 14 years. Saw the Tipperary claim in November or December last, no person was working there. Asked Hall if the gromid was jumpable. He replied evasively. Seeing the claim was abandoned, laid an information for the can«'diction of the 1 certificate. Never spoke to any other person about it. : By His Honor—Aiever spoke to Hall ; knew‘nothing about Scott; served Hall, Resta, and M ‘Kay personally, left summons for Hoffman on the ground. The case was heard before Mr Warden Simpson, proved the service of the summonses, and made Air Simpson acquainted with 'the manner •of service. Cancellation was decreed by Air Simpson. Pegged out a new claim and •formed a new party, the new claim was part ■of the old one. Never worked for JSeotf. Hall naver arranged for me to do so. Hold no interest in the claim now, sold out to a Chinaman. Laid the complaint by virtue -of my miners right. Cross-examined—Scott, Hall and myself were at Macetowc in November, IS7HWent there with the intention of looking Tor a claim. Went to Tipperary claim with Hall. Before taking -out the summons washed a prospect. Hall shewed me the claim and told me to try it. Remained four uiights with Hal! at his tent. Told Resta and 'Hall they [should have shares. Hall said all right. Gave Resta one share, Hall two shares, M ‘Kay two shares, and kept ono myself. Agreed to sell tho share on the ■27 th of July, and completed the sale ou tho 30th. Cross-examined Sold the share for L 220 to Mr Sew Hoy. Received summons from Scott on the 2Sth. Thomas Hall re-called - Air Johnson asked for no evidence from this defendant, only an explanation that the allegations of Air Tinn respecting the virtue of 'his oath were incorrect. Hall denied the modest impeachment. Cross-examined—Trayuor did not sny lie would give me a share when lie asked for my miner’s right. Lost money by the old claim. Sold tlie shares I received from Trayuor. J. O. M‘Arde.ll, auctioneer, Queenstown, gave evidence that he purchased a share from Hall. Air Johnson argued that His Honor had •no jurisdiction, it was not an appellant case, -mid he had no power to -set aside what was alone in a competent court of jurisdiction. 'His Honor ruled so far with Mr Johnson and granted a nonsuit as regarded Trayuor. ■ln the matter of Hall he considered it must lie held that he was in the position of a Trustee for Scott until he (Scott) registered his purchase. As the present claim only ■represented one-half of the original claim, and taking an average of the sales of shares, die would give a verdict against Hail for >1.350 damages and 1.42 costs. Tho decision evidently gave great satisfaction to tho large number of persons .assembled to hear the case. Tho late cases of mining swindling at Maeetowu by what is termed “jumping.” ami getting cases adjudicated upon when tho parties have not "been summoned, was the subject of much public comment, as tending to drive away ■capital from the district, more especially as all these oases have been undertaken by men of very shady reputation. Appeal Coput. W. Gardner, appellant ; See Sing and ■others, respondents. Appeal against a decision of Mr Warden Stratford, in that ho inflicted a penalty for a breach of tho mining regulations instead •of declaring forfeiture. His Honor held that Mr Stratford had acted quite according to tho Goldfields Act and dismissed tho appeal with costs. The hearing of a .-few bankruptcy cases •occupied the Court all day on Friday, when the session closed.