HOKITIKA WARDEN’S COURT

Hokitika Guardian, 3 February 1922, Page 4

HOKITIKA WARDEN’S COURT

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 2nd. (Before Warden Meldrum). SUIT FOR .FORFEITURE. j Receiver of Goldfields -Revenue v.| L. Tomasi (Mr -Murdoch) a suit for; 1 forfeiture of sawmill license, -Terema-j kau. Mr Murdoch for the defendant! admitted non-erection of the mill, buti asked for a fine in lieu of forfeiture.l; Leonard Tomasi gave evidence thatjj some time ago he took up an area at] i Payn’s gully, erected a sawmill and has! been continually (Jutting since. The! second area which he took up over] the Greenstone creek, wa s the one forjj whi c h he was being sued to-day. If a) bridge was erected over the Greenstone; 1 creelc it would mean a great reduction in cost of working the area. Had expended over £-750 in working his; present area. If forfeiture was not, made, lie would give an undertaking to erect the mill on the area within six months.

John Gilbert, sawmiller, Kumara gave evidence in support. Tho Warden decided to inflict a fine in lieu of forfeiture, the fine to be £lO, the mill to be erected on an approved site within six months. ANOTHER SUIT. ‘ Mining Registrar v. John Boyd, A. O’Halloran and J. R. Hickson, suit for cancellation of timber license and tivo reservations, Hokitika Gorge. Mr Murdoch appeared for J. Boyd and A. O’Halloran, and on their behalf asked for their shares not to he forfeited. He admitted tho fact that the mill had not been erected in the time specified. Mr Hickson did not appear to defend. Ambrose O’Halloran deposed he was a partner in the timber license and reservations situate at Hokitika Gorge. They had endeavoured to take a sawmill engine and boiler to the mill but were unable to get within two miles of the area, owing to the state of pigeon creek where a washout had occurred. Some time ago a dissolution of the partnership took place and Mr Nalder was appointed receiver. Airs Ryan, one of the shareholders paid £3OO to Mr Robinson. If the other .members of the syndicate were

not prepared to go on with the mill, the other members of the party were prepared to push on the partnership dissolution and curry on the erection of the sawmill to completion within six months

Hannah Eliza Ryan ddfiosed she resided at Riniu. On I2th. February, 1921 she paid £250 into the Hokitika Gorge Syndicate. She paid it to W. H. Robinson and J. R. Hickson. She had not received that money or*any portion Lack The first payment was for £62 10s .paid to Mr Robinson in connection with the same project. She

received ,notice of a further call of £62 10s in May last. She did not pay this last call. She saw Mr Robinson who said she was to take no notice of the demand for the call, which was from a Christchurch firm of solicitors. She claimed she was an unregistered owner of the property that was before the Court to-day. As far as she knew Mrs Hickson was tho Secretary of the syndicate. She had not been able to get any satisfaction as to her position in the syndicate. She had asked Mr Hickson where her money was and he ;had stated in the Bank of N.S.* ; She asked his Worship not to cancel: these licenses until some settlement was come to. If she gat her .money: hack She was quite ..prepared to wash her hands of tho whole transaction. Her brother (J. Boyd) had advised her to enter intd the transaction. He was unable to. be present that day having been working all night at a breakdown on the Kanieri Power water race. At this stage Mr Murdoch asked for an adjournment for two weeks to enable further evidence to be brought forward in support of hiß application. His Worship said that so far there was not evidence to enable him ,to consider the application for a fine in lieu of forfeiture. The position was certainly a peculiar one and they wanted a few rays of light to clear up the position, especially to show what was tho connection of Mrs Ryan with the areas. He would grant the application for adjournment, to be dealt with at the next sittings on February 14th.