WARDEN'S COURT.

Inangahua Times, Volume IV, Issue 90, 2 November 1877, Page 2

WARDEN'S COURT.

Wednesday, October 31ts, 1877, (Before E. Shaw, Esq., Warden.) Francis Walker and party applied for mining lease nfc Boatman's, comprising ground kno?vn as the "Royal Standard Lease. Messrs Deegan and party, M'Konny and par,tji;, and others appeared to object. Mr Staito appeared for the applicants, Mr Pitt for M'Kenny and party, and Mr Hankiu fpr Deegan and party. Tip following. evidenec was taken. Kobert Janrieson — • I havo been at Boatman's off and on for six years. I know the ground which ia the subject of this application. I assisted to peg out the ground with Jolin Clarke and Donaldson. 3^ think wo. pegged the ground^on fcho 4'h or sth September last. I laid off a base line for the. centre of the ground, and then cut. lines at ri^Ut augles and put in sis pe<>B. I did this for each lease. I popped off tho north lease first. I used pegs from four to five feet lii»h, and from, two to. four inches in thickness, with tlie. fXjiection of one peg, which w,as from. 3 fo.-t 0 incließ,to 4 feet. I 1 cut tlie pegs, of round limber, squared them, at tlie ends, and drove them, a foot int) tho ground. The pegs have been maintained ever since. Before pegging the ground we appointed Francis Walker to go to town and see what ground was available there. After pegging the ground I came to lleeflon.to search the Warden's b00k.3. I inquired as to tho ground south of the Boatman's Creek Company, and w ; as told the Try Again. I was told by the cleric of tlie office that the Try Again, and; A. 1. wore held by John. Williams and liYaucis Walker. I- saw the plan in, the survey office and found Francis Walker's name on the A. 1. loase, and John Williamls name on the Try Again lease, I recog* niso tho plan produced as that seen by mo in tho offico, but if; has since been altered by the addition of the names to the (wo le>ses of Jacob M/'Kenny and J. Deegan. Mr Staite suggested that the surveyor should be called to explain the alteration, Mr Woolley admitted thafc the plan had been, altered as staled by the. witness, and the reason was that when the map was prepared he. (Mr Woolley) was under tho impression that M'Kenny's and Beegan'a. applications had. been can» celled, but since then ho had. learned tc the contrary, and had therefore, placec their names upon, the map. The alfera tion had. been made since the. presenl litigation. commenced. It was oueiomarj to alter plans in such a way. Mr Staite thought suoh a line of octior highly improper, aqd trusted it woulc nev.or be repeuted... . The Warden considered that the sur a veyor'u explanation was quite satisfactory 1 Mr Staile thought otherwise, and hopct \ the practice would ho put a. stop to. i Examination continued^— lfoundi speci ■, mens on tho ground before applying fo b lease and, djscpvcrgd a. reef after lodging

the application and formed a company. We have been working upon the ground ever since the application. No otherperson bus worked on the ground. On the day we found the reet Deegan, cameup and asked the name of the lease, and whether there was ground taken, up south of it. I told him the leases were the Globe and Francis Walker.. He did not advance any title to it. I have not seen Mr Trennery or McEeuny up. tkere.. It was publicly known that we had appjied for the ground. When I pegged out the ground I saw some pegs of very old date, but no new signs of occupation,. bu,t in the ground I took up I saw no pegs,. Had there been pegs, there I should ha,vo ssen, them. By the fourt — I did not discever flay pegs within the whole of the- ground we took up. My pegs go on the south side ■ of Boatmen's Creek, they do not go on to tha north side. I did not inquire for the Alexandra or Thompson's pegs. I crossed the creek up towards Golden Gully. I I did not cross the creek to the north of my line to pat poys in. Wo lodged the £20 for- the lease after we. pegged, oat the ground. I did net- lodge tho money for the lease. I did; not measure my pegs. I hail a billliook, tomahawk, and compass, but I had no rule. Tho ends of the pegs were square. Some of them were 4s. feet high. . They were two to four iuuhes in dimensions or thereabouts, I do not know whether the pegs are- there now. I made the pegs Donaldson and Clarke were with me at the time. I cut the pegs, and they put them in and I drove them, down withtho axe. The ground I pegged was south, of Thompson's. The right angle runs, east aud. west. I pegged one lease each day. I pegged tho Frauds Walker lease, first. I think Clarke and Donaldson as.sisted mo to peg out each lease. I asked the Clerk of tho Court what ground was. held soujLh of Boatman's Creek, and he told; me the Tri-« Again and tho A 1 Lease. 1 did not, to my knowledge, ask him whether any ground had been taken up there within the past month, I know whether there were no pegs on the ground. To the west of our ground there were about a dozen old pegs all rotten. The pegs may have been about tho centre of the A 1 Lease's boundary. I saw one peg. about tho ccrtre of our base line. The surveyor asked me for two of our pegs, and I showed him the north and south base-line pegs. I showed one to Mr Woolley and one to his man. By Mr Pitt— l oouW not state tho area I pegged. I pegged. 3200 or 2300 feet along the base lino, and about 300 feet on. each side of the bas<»'ine east and wes'» I completed tho pegging of the Francis Walkor on the one day- On the Globe bnse-line I pegged about UOQ feet and GOO feefeusfc and west. We took up the ground in two leases because wo wanted to make tho most of it. It was discussed and decHerl to take up the ground in two, leases. I don't know why the ground was. taken up in two loases. The A 1 Lfi-aso had been marked out then. I was shown one of tbe A 1 Lease pegs. It was the north-east peg. I did not make chat peg the start of my base line. Walker showed mo that peg, I did not know the southeast peg of tho A 1 until Mr Wolley showed it to me. According to the lines Walker showed mo wo would be considerably to the eastward of the A 1 Lease. I put in the centre peg ©n the southern boundary of (he Francis Wai'' leer. I I hen went chopping and thoy went east and west to put the pegs in. I went to see where tho pegs were on tho southern boundary. I did not put all the pegs in, but knocked them down with tho axel I went south a little and came back. Tbe south-cast peg was pointed out to mo. It was 300 feet away Tho south-east peg thero crossed Boatman's Creek. The north- west peg wxs pointed out to me. It was about 300 feet away. There was a line cut. The eastern line was cut previously and we cleared it. I did not see the uorthrwest peg, but I believe Clarko put it in. I saw him 20 with a peg in that direction. 1- cut all the pegs. I did not put in tho northwest, south-west, southeast, or north-east peg of the GJobo ground. The north-east peg of tho Globe does not cross the main creek. I have known the ground for five. or six years and remember hearing talk of Deegan and M'Kenny' application. Nev.or heard of auy dispujte "between. M'Kenny, J. William?, and others until after wo had pegged the ground. lam quite sure of that. The north-east peg of the Globe does croas the creek. I made a. mistake. I did not cross, the creek to that peg,, but Clark showed it. to me. I think the names of the claims have bee.n,cbangpdi The name ' of the Company was changed:; I W v as thero when Mjr Woolley surveyed the I claim. Our ground has not boe,n surveyed at all. He asked me w,here the north-west and south-west pegs, were.and j his man went with meand.li showed' him the others, 16^ acres is an ordinary t claim. r By the Court—Two of the pegs I did. not go to— tho south-east, and north-east ! pegs. Two distinct pegs were put in to :l serve as adjoining boundaries. When I started I was told to pog two leases, but . nothing was said about ibe area. I have - t had some experience in pegging leases. L \ We knew at the titno about tho area, of the Francis Walker lease. G. J. Woolley-- 1 am district surveyor 3 r I prepared tho plans produced. It v my g duty to luruish plaus. JNo,yne asked, mp

specially to prepare the plaus. llr Pitt obtained plans in the office. Ho did not request me to prepare the plans produced, The plans produced show the leases sur* veyed and is a correct plan of the leasea recommended. Any information not furnished by the plan is contained in my report accompanying it. My report is in the possession, of tho Warden. The ground coloued yellow on the map, forms pa.it of that recommended to tho A 1 Loase On the 23rd of October at the request of FitzGerald I went over Fitzgerald's pegs. Fitzgerald has not applied for a lease, no portion of the laud applied for by Deegan has been granted to any other person. A small portion of the ground on tho south of the creek has been granted to King. TFitzgeraid said ho intended to dispute tho application, and it was a portion of my duty to visit tho ground. I do. occasionally receiye fees for private surveys. I received no fee in the present e/se ;. am not aware fhat Mr Bayfeild paid the fees for the present objections. The pegs I saw on tho ground were those of leases which had been either refused or abandoned ;. the peg at the south-east corner ia the one put in for M'Kenny's lease : I did not go to the- northern peg of McKenny's grounds. My report of tho 30th December relative to McLean's application for the same laud is in Court [report read.] That report contains my impressions at tho time ;. I regarded the laud, as under consideration;, plans lately show the land to be abandoned. In 1872 the land is shown by plaato belong to Deegan and others. In a letter, of 1874, it is shown that Bunlin and were the holders j. by tltat plan tho land is shown as abandoned. A plan, prepared this year shpws the land as abandoned ; had no reason to suppose- tho land was not abandoned until lately v know that Mr Trennory is iuterested in M'Kenny's application \-l know also that he is a large iandholder in the distsiot Ido not know of any particular applications- in his name which have been allowed to stand over for years ; I know of claims in which ho is interested which have not been in work for some time ;, he is interosied in a lease at Painkiller.. The survey wjs not made until lately owing to pressure of work > there are plenty of other leases in the same position ; : I know the Venus lease it is about two years since the application was granted. It win work now, but Ido not know whether work has. been carried on continuously. Tho leaso has been surveyed about a your. There are no other mips in the office relative to Boatman's, but those in Court now. The plans are altered from time to time i they will not always qUo correct information with* out explanation. By Mr Hankin ■— King and party'sapplication was for a special claim. Henry Lucas — I am cleric of the War-, den's Court and receiver of Goldfields avenue). On 7th SeplPtnlwr received, from Francis Walker deposits on two leases at -Boatman's. Have frequently given information to the- public relative to mining leases. Have- told inquirers that disputes between Deegan and others had net been settled. Never led anyone to believe that the ground was abandoned j that would be oulsido my duties ;. was aware that the applications- had never been dealt with by the Government. The Government agreed to grunt tho land to M'lCenny, provided that he made a satifactory arrangement with Beegaaaad others, but M'Kenney refused to enter Into such an arrangement. Do not remember Deegan ever asking for his lea3e j but believe that John Williams has ap* plied on his behalf. Cmnot say whether M'Kenny has or has not applied to me with regard_to his leases, but rather believe he has. It is usual for the Government to gazette or refused mining leases. Cannot say whether M'Kenny's applica* tion has been so dealt with. Cannot recollect Mr Trennery applying to me for tho lease within the last twelvo months, except until recently. Alexander Donaldson — I am a miner living at Boatman's ; and one of the applicants of Walker and party. There are several applicants. I have been in tho district for about four months. I know the ground in dispute ; I live upon it. I assisted to peg out the leaso. On the d#h and sth of September we put in sis. pegs, one at such corner, and one in the centre of each end. There were sis pegs, to each lease ; I did not sco all the pegs, put in.. I saw all but the eastern boundary. They were full size pegs. I have been working on the ground ever since it was pegged. When we pegged it out we saw nothing to lead us to believe that the ground had been lately pegged^ by anyone else. There were old workings on the lease. Remember John Deegan, coming, up to the ground one day ; hs. did not to my knowledge make any claim to the ground. We have found a. golden, reef in the ground. . By Mj 1 ,. Haakin— We pegged out the northern, claim, first. The pegs, were from, two, to four inches in "Paw no ol&peg? at all ou.tllo Francis Walker lease. Neyer heard.it mentioned before we pegged, that the ground was in dispute. John Clarke— l am one of^ the Francis Walker., party, and one of the men, who pegged out tho lease 3on the. sth of September.. I put in. the eastern, pegs. of the two claims. Have since seen all' the pegs, and believe they were adopted', by the surveyor. B.y M.r Hjinkiu-Tlie pegs, were, from

two to fo'ir inches in thiclttu-is, but can't swH.ii?- to there dimensions. I havo a miners right. Have heard that various parties had applied for the gMund. Saw no old workings on the around. Made no inquiries before peggiuu. By Mr Pitt — It was after we found gold that wo heard our title was to be disputed.. By the Court— l had no miner's right iat Ike time I pegged the ground. H saw old rotten pegs, on the ground, but none ou our Hues. The only instructions I received when- starting was to peg. out two leases, and make tbo base line where we thought best. K-iow no especial reason why we made two leases. We thought w,e could make a little- more money by having two leases. Francis Walker— l am, a miner residing at Boatman's, and tho party whoso name is specified in the application. I hold both a miner's right and business license. ; I found the money for the deposit, und IMr Bayfeild acted for me. Bofore pegging out I made inquiries in tho survey office from Mr Curie and saw the plans ; and was told that the A. 1 lease and tho Boulder Claim were tho only two claims ! legally held in the locality, the rest being open for occupation. The result of my inquiries in Lbc office was that the ground was avulable, The two leases applied for about equal an ordinary lease. The same shareholders are not in both leases. Ac- ! cording to my application tbo ground does not encroach upon any other lease. I am an old resident of Bjalman's aud know tho ground well. It has not beeu ■ hona iiic occupied during the past year. Should s.iy that with the exception of what we have done no work has boon done on tbe ground for three or four years' By the Court — I gave instructions to peg out two claims, as we wished to cover all the ground we faucicd. It is since the pegging that fresh shareholders have come in. G. Wise— l am a shareholder in the Francis Walker. On the 26th September went to tbe Warden's Office with Mr Gulline, and asked Mr Lucas what ground was occupied, and he said that all but tbe two lease mention was available. About a week after heard that our title would bo questioned. The reef was struck early in September, and it became public inlbr» ma tion. By Mr Pitt — Have had a good deal of< experience about claims at Boatman's. Have seen Deegan's. name on old plans, aud heard M'Kenny's name, but Taasnever in Court duriug litigation>aboub the ground iv question. By Mr Hankin It^was about the 26th September, that 1 first heard tbe ground was- available. Do net recollect a conveasation with you relative to Deejrau's action. First learnt from- Mrs John William-? on cither tke 1-st or 2ud' of October, that IX-egan laid claim to the ground, because she told me that Mr Hankiu was telegraphing to the Govern-nie-nt abou£ the case,, and I thereupon consulted the shareholders, and we sent a telegram to- the Government requesting them not to deal with the ground until our application had been heard. I may have henrd about Deegan. before I wrote the letter produced. Can't recollect dis tinctty when I first heard about the title being disputed This closed the ense foivthe applicants. TTpon the resumption of the Bitting of the Court yesterday tfiornin r M* Staite requested penr.iasipn to- recall Mr Wise which was acceded to. 'G. Wise, recalled— The nsmes upon the application M'Eenny, are Murper, Kanft, iiapkam, Koberts and Bradbary. ltanft to my knowledge has been, absent from tke Colony for about a year. He is at present engaged upon a geological survey in Victoria. By Mr Pitt— l am not prepared to say that Ranft does not intend- to return. Heard that ho went to Victoria to study in the School of Mines there. John Deegan — lam a miner, and in January, 1872, 1 assisted to peg out tho ground in question. I produce block of certificate for 12 men's ground dated December, 1872,. granted to me. I attended tke Court, and there being no | objection, the ground was gra-nted to me. We then deposited £20<with the Clerk of tke Court for a mining lease. On the following Sunday we had a meeting of shareholders to decide upon prospecting the ground. M'Shaia and myself were appointed to prospect the ground. The ground kad not been surveyed then, but ultimately it was. I attended tke Court on the hearing of the lease application, and it was refused on the ground that tke area included part of Boatman's Creek. We then went to the Warden and lie agreed to grant the lease if we would leave the creek out. This we agreed to. At the hearing of that application,. I was not present, but Mr Warden Broad toli me it was all right, Thesecond application was heard 22ad November, 1872. I am quite certain I was in Eeelton upon that date. I was under the impression that the lease was recom* mended. Never received any notice of its being refused. I left tho ground about tbe time that Mr Shapter told me tke lease was recommended. Cross-examined— The first lease application we withdrew to make a fresh one and leave tke creek out, and we made the secend application. Wo «orkod on tho grouud either before or after tko second application. Tho second application was made on the 22nd August, 1874, I did seven or eight days work on, ihe land. We were also engaged putting up our camp. I swear that Mr Warden Broad told me that my application was all. right and that there- was no i objection. Tho Court was keld in .Barker's , HoteJ. Know nolhiug relative to. the . lease having been refused. Do- nnt recollect having applied to the officials relative to the lease. 1 was at tke i. liaast fpr. ei^kt or. nine d.ays. I. was.,

absent from Reefton about five months. Left Westport for the Haast in October, I swear I did not tell Mr Broad that I intended to aßStidon the least*, I considered the- ground wk protected by the application and wnited f'H* the lease-, I have- been, out of the Colony for some year*. I can't s.veur that I own -.in interest in the le:»so at the present bimo, I sold my interest to Mr J, Williams and to Mr Brunn, ( sold the- whole of ni.v interest before I left the Colony. The present shareholders are: Willianiß, MB'Slmm. *W, Roberts, J, Quinlun, andl Mr Hanfein ; I believn neither folia Williams nor H. G, Hankia.. Have not paid or em. ployed 1 anyono to maintain, my pegs, Have- been ouce on tho ground since I returned, from the P'llmer. I will swear I. sold to Brunn before E lefi all my interest in Boatman's, V roi>pivu.j £J0 . or £12. I ear't say who will be- tho shareholders if I am. successful; M.> William-? promised no au interest. £ went on to the gromi I ch<j d»y the reef was struck. By Mr Pitt — My two. original appiicitions were for the same ground. I did not see or hear of the application having been refused by the Government in January, 18?t. It may have been, advertised in the Enan^aliu.l liorald. but that paper was not seen out there, Will swear I never kuew that the appliex*. tion had been refused. Jjy tho Court— Our title to the ground has never been surrendered. My title was surrendered when I sold* I did not seii the objections, but heard that they had been sunt m. I will swear tint Mr Warden Broad told me that ray applica* tion was all right, I uever told Me Warden Broad that I inteuded to abandon the application. John Williams— l am a farmer re*, ground, at Boatman's. My son is a shareholder in the ground, I purchased au. interest in the lease from John Deegan,. It was after the second application that [ bought iv, The first application was refused on accouut of a creek and Mr Broad said if we would leave out tliv> creek the lease would be granted, siding at Fern Flat. I know the Standard* We then re-pegged and applied and Deegan wa< appoiuted to answer the application ; I was in the Court-bouse whenthe application was called on. Never saw a notice in the paper that the lease was. refused nor never received a notice to that effect, and as proof of that fact I attended and objected at a much later date to thoapplication of M'Kenny ; I applied to thoSuperintendent for the lease in April or May 1875, and he told me that as M'Keny would not carry out the arraugeniema. proposed I should have lease, and, saw I Mr O'Conor on the same day in referenceto the lease, and he told me I could takethe base Lome with me ; think I had a conversation in lieef:ou vith O'Connor,, and he told me he would setd the leasedirectly he got back to Nelson. Cross-exainiu-d— l applied to the Cora-* , missioner -oi Grown Lands relative to thelease ; I have a personal interest iv tbu application -, I did promise to givo Deegan au interest, Mr Hankin receiving an interest to* acting for tb« Company until it is registered ; I paid Deegan £10* 10s for the Werest f it was at the time be was leaving Iteefton ; I do not knowthat rt is ncoessary to register transfers, of interests under applications; 1 have nlread.v sworn, that I never hearJ that the application had been refused by tho Government;- never knew that McLean nppUetf for the ground ;- 1 have b*en many times on the eround. bat not within tho last year or two; Bta&e my solemn cmli I have been in tbe* Wardens olkco ten times inquiring about the lease; I have been three times during the past year * received a letter from the (tovernment advising amalgamation- with M'Eenny. The ground we claicMs JSo I) south of Thompsons;;! never knew anything about an application by JLine and party ; I went to> Nelson on general business ; I distinctly repeat that I never heard tint Deegan'S- second application, was refused. Mr Luca* nerer- told me that- it had been refused. . By the- Court — I do not recollect giving evidence- upon* the application of William M'Leanj.rshoutd be-verymueh. surprised to hear that 1 did gjve evidence on that application. The- evidence produced is signed by me, but I have no recollection, of giving, til© evidence produced, Andrew M'Shain— l am. a. miner and; peggedioff the grouud in question, It adjoins Thompson's prospecting claim. In the first instance -we look upon.it as aa. ordinary claim, We then. worked and agreed to apply for it as a lease ;; 1 think it was. in 1872 tint tbe first application, was heard. There was a Beconchapphcation, and it was to be^ recommended, When the case -was called, Deegan was not ia« Court, and I walked up to Mr Shaptep wbo was sitting at tbo ■ billiard taft'e, and»ke said it <vas all right. Mr Shopter stood up for the shareholders. There was no objection. We subsequently went to Mr Broad's office, and Ii understood that it was- recommended ;:lisweav distinctly that Mr Warden Broad told us be had recommended the lease*. Tins was after the second-hearing. He satisfied my mind that he would recommend the lease, This closed the case, Mr Hankin shortly- addressed the Court on behalf of Deepn and -party setfcin? fortli. the chief poiuts upon which they.relied in tho application. Mr Staite and Mr Pitt were prepared to waive the right of addressing the Court. Tho Warden said ths position seemed to bo that Deegan and Co., by a series- of. strange blunders alleged that they were unaware that their application Jiad been refused.!. For four years they had been pursuing au igpisfatuus in ihe shape of a .mining lease about the existence or.flon-existen.je of which they appeared to have known Bathing. This state ot: affairs seemed to have been brought about by the extroardinary procedure of the NeUon Executive who seemed .to have encouraged Deogitu and Co., by holding out hopes that they would get the lease. He (the Wardon). smypathised with Williams who Bays tlw matter was kept upon, his trind for such a length of time. For years ho was kept in • uncertainty as to whether or not his applica« tion had been dealt with, aud lw had filially been induced to take a trip to . Nelson to sou after it, There could be nocaso more deplorable, and it certainly disclosed ■ most extraordinary mul-aduiinstratton on the part of the Executive. As to M'Kenuy, he (tho Warden) . had little sympathy. His equitable claim ,wa» of the poorest possible nature. He was unable to discover a single act on his part to • support his claim in equity. Tho whole of the papers in . the case would, however, be • forwarded to Wellington with the usual re*, commendation. The Court then adjourned.