WARDEN'S COURT, RUTHERGLEN.

Grey River Argus, Volume VI, Issue 385, 2 July 1868, Page 2

WARDEN'S COURT, RUTHERGLEN.

Monday, Junb 29, (Before Mjichaej. Keogh, Esq,, Warden.) OAVA2*AGH AND CO. V, COUCH AND OQ, In this, caae Cavanagh and Co. put in a claim for certain surplus ground, -which, they alleged -was held by Couch apd Co., at the Eight-Mile Terrace, near Gocka, Bulla, Owing to the precipitancy of the* rush to the ground great difficulty haa ta be encountered in properly surveying it unless by a professional, and the. case "was adjourned for a week to allow time for a, properly qualified surveyor to go up and; make a report. Mr Perkins appeared fop Couch and Co., and applied for costs, which will be decided when the case is heard. GORDON AND CO. V. QRAM AND CO. It appears that Gordon and Co. have two dams, the upper one not being secure, as a quantity of water leaked out and found its way to the lower one. Gram and Co. had asked permission to use the surplus water which was granted, if taken from below the second dam ; but instead of that they cleared out an old race and took it from a leakage of the top dam, which gave rise to the present litigation. Robert Gordon said that last week he, saw Gram clearing out an old race that lead to their upper dam, which took thQ water, that leaked from it. He thought it might take about twenty minutes to make good the damage ; but he and his mate had been put to great expense and inconvenience through not being able to wash up some dirt, which they wanted to do prior to their taking in another share-* holder, who now claims a share of it. Ha estimated their loss at £5. Peter Campbell and Richard Bandar* gave corroborative evidence. Nis Gram admitted clearing out the race, as he saw the water running to waste. He had asked permission to use the waste water, which had nut been used for the last two months. Charles Wall was, likewise examined for the defence. The Warden said that there was no doubt that the defendants had unlawfully interfered with plaintiffs' race, but as they had given their evidence in such a. straightforward manner he should not inflict a heavy fine. Had it not been, so he should have fined them £10, as it waa. he should order them to pay £L fine, with costs of Court, and £i damages. LONG AND CO. V. BOOTH AND CO. It seems that Long and Co. have been engaged for the past six months in washing tailings in the gorge, at the south end of the Victoria Lead. Booth and Co, are working a rich claim, and have a long tunnel that leads to the gorge where they sluice, and their boxes resting on the hopperings. Finding that their boxes were likely to slip they prevented Long from continuing to work, as they allege that they caused the water to wash away the bank on which they were placed. Long and Co. claimed i3O damages, for* being prevented from working. This, case was fully gone into and postponed until a contra action had been tried, in which Booth and Co. aued M'Gregor and Long for damages £40 sustained by them through the .course of the water-channel being changed, through defendants work. After a careful hearing of the case, the Warden decided on dismissing both cases, as he did not see that the injury was; caused by Long and Co.; iv fact, there was not sufficient proof of that being the case. .-:"', Henry Long said that he had been

working in the gorge for the last six months, and that he had his ground pegged out ; that his upper pegs were eighteen or twenty feet above Booth's tunnel. On Wednesday last, the 24th, was working with his mate, and saw Booth and Co. putting. in boxes and ■lifting the dirt. He could prove by gold receipts that they had averaged .£ll a-week. ; John M'Gregoß said that he was a mate with Long, and had been so for the last two months. Booth and Co. had cautioned them against any damages they might sustain. He did not think their claim of .much value. He had not done much since he had been there. John Williams said that he was formerly mate with Long. During that time there was no objection made to their washing the tailings. They had permission to do so at various times. To the best of his recollection the pegs were fifteen or twenty feet above Booth' 3 boxes and down to the bend. James Booth said that the ground in dispute belonged to thorn. They had told Long and Co. that they could have what came down the creek. Long and Co. were washing the tailings coming from their claim. They objected to the way Long and Co. were working, by diverting the creek, as it washed down the hopperings on which their boxes were placed, which had come down through the channel being altered. Benjamin Kenvick said the cause of the boxes coming down was through tho stuff being removed from the creek, as well as the water which came through the boxes. Judgment iv this case was deferred. BOOTH AND CO. V. M'GREOOR AXI) CO. James Booth said that M'Gregor and his mate had been caiitioned against working so near their boxes, as it would undermine them and bring them down. They had been compelled to build a wall to prevent their boxes coming down. They had been put to great inconyenience and expense by it. There had been as much as 21bs. weight of gold in a day's washing. Patrick Smith said he was working mates with Booth, and was present when he cautioned M'Gregor against taking away hopparings. Had told Long that he conld have headings and tailings &) long as they did no damage. He was the oldest shareholder in the tunnel. None of his old mates interfered as there was no damage done. Both cases were dismissed.