WARDEN'S COURT, STAFFORD.

Kumara Times, Issue 1451, 23 May 1881, Page 2

WARDEN'S COURT, STAFFORD.

Thursday, May 19. [Before J. Giles, Esq., Warden.] Ah Ching and party applied for head-race. Granted.—Mr Hannan for applicants. Robert Porter applied for head-race.— Application adjourned. —Mr Hannan for applicants ; Messrs Seddon and Byrne, for objector, John Yulton. Robert Davidson applied for an injunction to restrain Alfred Bolton and Albert Stephens from working away the extended portion of his head-race (3138), on the ground that though the same had been cancelled by the Warden, yet he had notice of appeal, and wished the race to be kept intact until the appeal was decided. Injunction granted conditionally on applicants paying all costs into Court. Objectors to find security in the sum of £ls t> restore race should appeal go against them ; if security found, then race to be worked away.—Mr Byrne for applicants ; Mr Seddon for objectors. John Roberts v. Ah Young, Ah Chuck, and Ah Chew.—Action to recover the sum of £0 damages for loss of water to head-race (No. 3135), Ballarat Bill's Gully.—Mr Byrne for plaintiff; Mr Seddon for defendants.— The plaintiff proved that defendants had worked away a portion of Ballarat Bill's Gully above the head of his race, consequently he lost all the water above that portion worked away, same being turned into defendant's tail-race.—On cross-examination, plaintiff admitted the working away of the gully took place prior to an action which he brought against same defendants in March last, in which damages were recovered for injury to a tail-race caused by defendants having worked away said gully.— Mr Keddon asked for a nonsuit. The plaintiff in this case was barred from further relief; the damage now claimed could have been estimated at the time of first action, and should have been included in the amount then claimed. If this claim was admitted, there would never be any finality to litigation; and next Court defendants might perhaps be brought up for damage to a dam. The next Court again may be in determining a suit for damage to plaintiff's claim. This cause of action occurred prior to the first suit. Defendants had eomplied with the order of the Court, and could not therefore be punished twice for the same offence.— Mr Byrne replied and argued that water-rights were exceptional, and that the law quoted would not apply; also that plaintiff could not estimate this damage at the time of first suit. —The Court held that the damage could be estimated. The Chinese had altered the configuration of the gully; no water could flow down to plaintiff's head-race on March 12th, the date of first suit. To have sued for the full

value of the head-race at that time was the plaintiff's proper course. As he had failed to do so, there Was now no right of action. Plaintiff nonsuited, and ordered pay all costs. Ah Young,.Ah Chuck, and Ah Chew v. John .Roberts.—Action to cancel certificate for head-race 3135. Defendant in this case sought to recover damages.—Mr Seddoti for plaintiffs j Mr Byrne for defendant.—The evidence of Roberts in the first cace proved that he was running the water held under this right through another race and the channel of water-right No. 3135 was being used as a flood-channel.—Mr Seddou claimed this sufficient for all they asked; they did not seek to cancel the water-right, but the channel only, seeing that it was in the way- of his clients depositing tailings. -The Court held that the action of defendant in converting his head-race into a floodchannel was in itself sufficient. Race cancelled, each party to pay their own costs. This concluded the business of the Court.