RESIDENT MAGISTRATES COURT.

Grey River Argus, Volume IX, Issue 713, 13 August 1870, Page 4

RESIDENT MAGISTRATES COURT.

Thursday, August 11. (Before W. H. Revell, Esq., R.M.) PERJUKY. James Wilkie was charged with having committed wiiful and corrupt perjury before Judge Ward in the District Court on the 27th July, dnring the hearing of a bankruptcy case, in which Jas. M'Cune applied for his discharge. Mr Guinness appeared to prosecute, at the instance of James M'Cune, and Mr Perkins appeared for the defence. Constable Flannery : I was Court orderly at the District Court on the 27th July last when the case of Jas. M'Oune, a bailiff, was called on before Judge Ward. Mr Wilkie was the opposing creditor, and was examined as a witness. I administered the oath in the usual form, and he kissed the bible now in Court. I heard the whole of his evidence. He stated that he saw forty loads of washdirt on the claim of the bankrupt ; I think on the Friday previous, but I am not sure of the precise day. I do not recollecb whether lie said he went on the claim alone, or in company with, auv one. He said he valued the washdirb at LI per load, and the claim at L2O. By Mr Perkins : I -understand he valued the claim at L2O, and not the defendant's share of the washdirt.

Harry Kenrick, clerk of the District Court, Gfeymduth, proved the preliminaries of James M'Cune's bankruptcy, and produced the order of the Court, Gazdte notice, the sittings of the Court, &c. On the 27th July, James M'Cune appeared, and applied for his order of discharge. He was examined, his discharge was opposed by Mr James Wilkie, the defendant, who proved his debt in Court. Mr Wilkie was examined on oath. I took rough notes for my own information at the time. Mr Wilkie stated that on Friday the 22nd July he was on the* bankrupt's claim, and went on to the paddock where the washdirt was stacked, and estimated the quantity of washdirt ready for washing at 40 loads, which he valued at LI a load. He stated he had spoken to two miners to come and value the. stuff on the ground ; but the men did not sjo to value it ; I forget for what reason. He also said that MrFitchett, a storekeeper on the North Beach, told him that the men were earning, I think, L 5 a week, a manj out of their claim, but I am nqt positive as to the amount. I belie vie Wilkie said he valued M'Cune's claim at L2O. I examined him as trustee and asked Mm if he would give L 5 for the claim, and he replied he would not as it would be valueless to him. Throughout Ins evidence Wilkie adhered to his statement that there were 40 loads of washdirb on the ground.

Cross-examined : He estimated it at 40 loads ; no definition was given of ;vhat he considered a load. The defendant used the words, " the previous Friday," to the day he was being examined, and that was the 27th. The date was fixed by M'Cune, who;. slated that on . the 18th . July he washed up all the dirt on the claim ; and on Friday, the 22nd, the day mentioned by Mr Wilkie, there were about two bar-row-loads- of washdirt on the; claim." ■ If the Court had been held on the 19th, as originally fixed, the " previous Friday" would have been the 15th ; but the date of the " previous Friday " was fixed as the 22nd while Wilkie was being examined. I think the bankrupt said there were never 40 loads of washdirt on his claim.

James M'Cune, a miner on the North Beach, and lately adjudicated a bankrupt : I was examined at the District Court, before Judge Ward, on the 27th July. The first date fixed for my examination was the 19th. Between.that date and the 27th, I worked my claim at intervals. The claim is the old Pioneer, which was sold off by Mr Wilkie, with its machinery, &c. Between the 19th and the 27th, there was not more than ten barrow-loads of washdirt on the claim. Mr Wilkie knows the claim well. On the 22nd July, I met him going out the North Beach while 1 was cowing ty town to attend, the Court, We reckon 12 hatvawfate fo to a toad of w&sft.dirt. I heard Mr Wilkie examined in the District Court on the 27th. He said he visited .my claim on the North Beach on Friday, the 22nd of July,, and saw rfttiere 40 loads of washdirt stacked on the claim. He prospected it, and estimated that it would run about 6dwts. to the load, valued at LI. He opposed my order of discharge, and it was SU3i' pended for a month. Defendant said that Fitchett told him that my mate had told

him (Fitcliott) that my claim was paying L 7 10s a week. Cross-examined : The most washdirt we ever had stacked on the claim was about 14 loads. That was after 1 filed my schedule. On an average the dirt ran 15dwt to the load. Some weeks we made L 7, and others we made nothing, when the weather was bad. There are pegs in the ground, but we never measured it off. i I think it is about 100 ft long by 34 wide. There are only a few load 3of headings i and tailings on the claim. The tailings were run into the paddock again and covered over. Some part of it is oldworked ground, and the old tailings ace left there. The two loads of washdirt were lying close to the box to the north of our face, on the top of a heap of mullock. I believe the mullock would run about a quarter of a grain to the load. We used to try the mullock in the Pioneer claim. I am not aware of 6dwt to the load being got out of the Pioneer claim after 1 left it. I heard that Mr Wilkie got 6dwt out of washdirt. I heard it said that Mr Wilkie was out the beach the previous Friday to the' day I met him, but I did not see him. Thomas O'Neil : I am M'Cune's mate, working on the North Beach. I was in the District Court as a witness on tlia 27th July, and recollect Mr Wilkie being examined in M'Cune'a case, but he could not remember what he said. This witness could not recollect anything until he wwats t severely rebuked by the "Bench, and cautioned as to his conduct in the bar. He then corroborated the last witness's evidence as to. the washing-up, iind the quantity of wash that- remained on the claim on the 22nd. In cross-examination he said that the largest quantity of wash they had in the paddock at one time was fourteen loads or thereabout. Any man, ! unless he was an experienced diggov, might mistake the headings for the wash on that lead, as there was so little difference in color between them. Several other witnesses were examined, who gave similar evidence as to the quantity of washdirt in the paddock on the 22nd July. Mr Perkins opened the case for the defence, and the defendant, when called upon, said he still adhered to what he said before Judge Ward, believing it to be true. He might have erred in judging the quantity of the washdirt, because he had very little experience in mining ; but in what he had said ho had no malice, and had no intention of committing perjury. For the defence the following evidence was called : — Charles Fitchett, a miner on the North Beach, said : I havo known M'Cune's claim for three months. On the 17th July I was on the claim, and saw M'Cune and his mate working. The washdirt was in a heap. There would be no less than 15 loads, and no more than 30. It was piled on the bank on a heap of shingle and tailings. I have been 17 years a digger, and five years on the North Beach. An inexperienced man might judge the washdirt at more or less. It was composed of blacksand and stones. It might go on an average about L 2 a load, perhaps more. I saw some mullock and strippings at the same place. That is washed on the beach, Sutcliff and party are washing it now. There are thousands of tons of it, and will all oe washed in time. I told Mr Wilkie that 1 had heard M'&me was making L7or L 8 a week. It would not pay if it did not, as Mr Wilkie lnd spent three months in stripping the claim. I saw; Wilkie down on the beach on a Friday, about three weeks ago. He asked me about the value of the claim, and I told him they would be making L 5 a week, and that 1 had seen 15 or 20 loads of washdirt in a heap there. Mr Wilkie told jne they had another heap a little lower down the beach. I saw it about 100 yards down, but I cannot say who that belonged to. Cross-examined by Mr Guinness : Any one going out there might easily mistake a stack of headings for. washdirt, there is so little difference between them. Johu Roebuck, a miner on the North Beach for the last four years, and with fourteen years' experience, said it was easy for an experienced man to tell the difference between the headings and the washdirt, in Wilkie's Pioneer Claim. An inexperienced man could not tell T.ho difference, unless he was accustomed to these beach workings. The ground there changes every quarter of a mile. He believed the headings would average betweeu three and four pennyweights to the load. Three weeks yesterday he saw only a heap of tailings on M'Cune's claim. He considered Mr Wilkie wasnotan experienced miner. He paid men, and had a manager on the Pioneer claim. The Magistrate said it appeared that the defendant had sworn that he went 'to the paddock for the purpose of seeing what was in it, and saw forty loads of washdirt. The evidence of all the witnesses went to show that these parties had nothing like that quantity on the ground at the time ; that they had washed up on the 18th, and all the washdirt on the ground on the day Mr Wilkie went there was two barrow-loads. It had been attempted to be set up that Mr Wilkie might have mistaken the headings or tailings, or a heap of mullock, for washdirt, but that could scarcely be possible, when it was considered that he had been owner of the same claim for three months. There was clearly a case for a committal. It was no business of his to enquire whether a jury would convict on the evidence ; he had only to consider whether a prirria facie case had been made "out, and he thought it had. The defendant would be committed to the Supreme Court for trial. Bail was taken, defendant in LIOO and two sureties of LSO each.

The Immigration and Public Works Bill has been read a second time. The large and important amendments suggested by Mr Stafford's party have been adopted by the Government, and the Bill is now hardly recognisable with its former state. All the objectionable features of the first Bill with respect to the enormous powers of expenditure . proposed to be given to the Executive, and Provincial Superintendents, have been cut'oub, and uovr tftft Bvii \a \\\ itsfcK h&rafesa— always supposing that the large scheme of Public Works and Immigration is not dangerous. Important alterations have also been made in that part of the Bill relating to water supply on the gold fields, chiefly due to the representations of the Gold Fields members. —Wellington Correspondent. The South Australian Parliament has resolved to petition the Queen to remove the restrictions upon free intercolonial exchange.