WARDEN’S DECISION

Hokitika Guardian, 20 December 1932, Page 7

WARDEN’S DECISION

ALTERED TRENCHES. AFTER CASE HEARD. GREYMOUTH, De c embe r 20. Significant remarks were made by Mj' W. Meldrum, Warden, at Greymouth. yesterday, when he gave his decision in the dispute regarding the pegging of an area at Dunganville, between two parties who desire to use the water held by an old dam. Edward Quinn (Mr J. W. Hannan) applied for a 'dam license in Block 2, Hohonu S.D. The application was objected to by James Harold Holmes and Cyril Nolan Curtig ('Mr T. F. Brosnan). The case was heard on November 29, and, in view of the direct conflict of evidence, was adjourned to enable the Warden to inspect the area. The case was again called last Tuesday, when some additional evidence was given. .In the absence of Mr Hannan, decision was deferred until to-day. The Warden , s aicl that the grounds of the objection were that the dam applied for had not been marked out in accordance with the provisions of the. Mining Act, that the applicant had not ported upon the ground a duplicate notice of his application, in compliance with the Act, and that the notice was posted subsequent to November 21. There was a direct conflict of evidence between the parties, h e said, and he personally inspected the ground, in their presence. One of the allegations made by the objectors wag that the trenches were 'not of the regulation size. “When they were inspected by me on the day after the last hearing,” continued Mr Meidrum, “undoubtedly they were of the regulation size, but it was pointed out that thoge trenches had been altered since the day before the hearing, when photographs were taken, fho wing 'the trenches. At the end of one of the trenches, before the hearing, there war, a tree or plant growing. On inspection, this plant wa« found uprooted, and lying on the ground in the centre of the altered trench. The photographs taken before the hearing showed the smaller-sized trenches, and later photographs showed that the trenches had been considerably enlarged. There was no question that on the day of inspection, the earth showed beyond all doubt that it hac been only recently disturbed. It was quite fresh and there \va s no doubt whatever that the trenches had beer, altered between the day of the hearing and the time of inspection next day. It was denied, on behalf of the applicant, that any alteration had been made, but it was quite evident that alterations had been made, and that the original tranche, 3 were not in compliance with the Act.. The mere fact that thee£ alterations had been made throws discredit oil the evidence of the applicant, aiid therefore, _ where there is a divergence in the evidence I bel.ievo the evidence of the chjCctorr and discredit the evidence of the appli. cant. I must uphold the objection, on the .grounds that the dam was not marked out in accordance with the provision.g of the Mining Act, 1926, that -he duplicate not’ce vva,g not posted in accordance with the Act, and thaf it was posted subsequent to November 24. The objection i. s therefore sustained.

Mr Brosnan asked for costs, and expenses for five witnesses. The Warden referred the costs to the' Registrar, to be fixed, and allowed £3 3 U solicitor’s fee.