WARDEN'S COURT.

Grey River Argus, Volume X, Issue 756, 22 November 1870, Page 2

WARDEN'S COURT.

CAMPTOWN.

Wednesday, November 16. (Before Mr Warden Whitefoord.) Frank Bennett and party v. John Cronin and party. — A complaint that defendants had so injured a dam at German Gully, a tributary of Abe's Gully, at No Town, that the said dam would not hold water ; and also, for a refusal to comply with a written order from the Warden. Damages were laid at L2O. This case had been before the Court on a former occasion. The defendants at that time applied for leave to construct a tunnel tailrace to enable them to reach their ground on a terrace at German Gully. The application was objected to ky Bennett and party on the gronnd that the tunnel would injure a dam, and drain the water from it, which they, in common with other parties, were continually using. An order was made by the Warden at the last hearing, that if Cronin and party would erect another dam of equal strength and capacity with the one they wanted to drive under, they could take in their tunnel, and they were directed to construct the new d:im at a place to be pointed out by the present complainants. Bennett and party now . alleged that defendants had not complied with the Warden's order ; that they had driven so close to the dam that all the water leaked out of . it, thereby depriving complainants of the means of working their claims. The defence was that the defendants had taken in their tunnel at the place pointed out by complainants, and they denied generally that they had disobeyed the Wardeu's order. The Warden in giving judgment referred to the order made by him on a former hearing of the case, and said there could be no doubt but that defendants had disregarded the terms of the order. He was of opinion that the complainants had made good their right to damages for the injuries sustained by them in consequence of defendants' acts. As the ca3e stood, he had no alternative but to inflict such a penalty as would deter others from disregarding the orders of the Court. A verdict would be given for complainants for Llo, with cosis. The defendants gave notice of appeal, to have the case tried by assessors. Patrick Gallagher and party applied for leave to construct a tail-race at No. 2 Gully, Nelson Creek. The application was opposed by Charles M'Veigh and Company, on the ground that' the tailings would bo deposited on the objectora 1 claim, to their serions injury. The plan of the ground was put in and examined by the Warden, who remarked that he perceived that the site of the proposed tail-race would be 400 yards above the upper boundary of the objectors' claim, consequently he did not consider the objection was a valid or reasonable one. He looked upon crreks a3 natural tailraces, and one party had as good a right to make use of them as another. The application would be granted.