THE ARROW.

Lake Wakatip Mail, Volume I, Issue 27, 1 August 1863, Page 3

THE ARROW.

(FROM OTJB OWN COBRESPONDENT.)

Tuesday, July 28.

There are circumstances of interest connected with the unhappy accident to the party of sawyers, which did not clearly come out in the evidence at the inquest. The hut was not on the bank of the Bush Creek proper, but of a small tributary stream which runs down a steep gully on the north side, about two miles from the township. The insignificance of this rivulet—for it has really been nothing more even in the late floods—lulled those men into a false security, especially as they were on a terrace some feet above its bed. A little above their hut, rough logs were piled, ready to be started down the hill side when required. As appeared in the evidence, the first sign of danger was a sudden crash, sounding as if some distance off up the ravine, and almost immediately the water was upon them in resistless force, driving the pile of logs down on the hut, and burying three of the ill-fated men in the debris. There is little doubt that this terrible accident was caused by a landslip, some distance above, blocking up the channel, until the accumulated force of the water burst through, hurling before it the material of the natural dam, and rushing in a deep and impetuous torrent down the valley. The body of the third sufferer has not yet been recovered; but as the police are on the spot, engaged in active search, it will probably be brought in to-day. The unfortunate man reported in my last as having been buried in one of the tunnels of the Arrow River, by the ground falling in on the 23rd instant, died on Friday evening. The news from up the Arrow is, as one might expect, most unsatisfactory. The water rose several feet higher than in the last floods, and consequently has made a perfect wreck of all mining property. The shanty at the Dunstan road ford was completely washed away, which will give an idea of the great height the water attained. The inmates escaped with hazard by the roof. The river must have risen at this point 16 feet or more. The Cafe de Paris was sold by auction for £145. Mr. Marshall was the nominal purchaser.

July 30th. The weather still remains unsettled, and keeps us in constant dread of another flood. We must hope for something more settled with the new quarter of the moon, which commences to-day. The Arrow has gone down considerably, but is still many feet above its ordinary level. Mining pperations have not been resumed to any considerable extent; in fact the last flood swept off everything that the devastations of the preceding ones had spared, and few miners have any tools or mining materials; what is worse, many have not the means to replace them. The effects of the calamities of last week caused such depression amongst all classes of the community with regard to the prospects of the township and the neighbouring diggings, that the Drainage Committee thought it necessary to convene a public meeting in order to afford them an opportunity of explaining what they had done and were doing for the amelioration of affairs. This meeting took place on Tuesday evening and was very numerously attended. The Chairman, Mr. Richmond, called on the secretary to state to the public the result of the labors of the committee.

Mr. Haughton then in a few words explained that in the first place a system of drainage by overshot wheels had been decided upon, but that it was not yet correctly ascertained from which creek it would be best to conduct the water required. The great expense of a tail race had induced the committee to consider whether it would not be practicable to raise the water to the surface and run it off into the river. Sub committees were now employed investigating the rocessary details, both with regard to construction and expense. The committee had sent in a memorial to the Superintendent, asking for a subsidy. The amount guaranteed in the township, £560, having justified them in so doing. Mr. Beetham had taken charge of the memorial, and had in every way most cordially seconded the objects of the committee.

The explanation was received with satisfaction, a few names were added to the committee and the meeting separated. The body of the unfortunate sawyer was recovered on Tuesday morning—it was completely covered with debris and was much mutilated. The funeral of the three took place on Wednesday.

July 31. The body of the man buried by the caving in of the earth in a tunnel not far from the township, has not up to this time been recovered. A great many slips have taken place since, and it is now thought that it will be more than a week before the party working can reach him.

The Arrow Township Committee, elected by suffrage of the holders of business licenses, commence their sittings on Monday evening next. Possessed of the full confidence of their fellow-townsmen, they will act as a Municipal Council; taking charge of all matters concerning the welfare of the township. The large attendance at the meeting last night, and the number who recorded their votes, showed plainly the popularity of this movement. It is truly considered a step in the right direction; some method and regularity is urgently needed in the bringing forward and advancing the many subjects of public interest which are continually pressing themselves upon the attention of an infant community. The committee will be the medium of communication with the Government authorities ; they will organize subscriptions for local and general objects when necessary, and will make such regulations as to the order and cleanliness of the streets as may [be from time to time expedient.

The Drainage Committee hold their fourth sitting on Friday eveving next, when the subcommittee appointed to take the levels and examine the ground for the water-race are expected to bring in their report. ARROW POLICE COURT. (Before R. Beetham, Esq.) Saturday, July 25. A. Shannon, for threatening and disorderly conduct, was fined 10s. only, as he had been in custody one night. George Grant was charged with stealing property in charge of an officer of the Court, under a distress warrant, in value £lO.

Thomas Fryer examined.—l am a bailiff. I seized certain goods, and on the 4th July I put in a man, and produced him my warrant, and asked him if he could read. He was there eight days. I took an inventory of the property; I produce it. The articles Mr. Grant took are in the inventory ; I value them at £lO. When 1 brought the auctioneer, these articles were gone. By the Court.—l did not leave an inventory with the man. My instructions were to hold and retain the whole of the property round and about the premises of Mr. Brown.

Cross-examined.—l remember 4th July; I seized Mr. Brown's premises. The premises are named in the inventory. Your brother showed me an assignment, warning me the seizure was illegal; I took a copy. I did take an inventory of the bakery and fittings on the 4th July. Frederick Burrill examined.—-Bailiff put me in possession. He did not read the inventory ; he gave me verbal charge of the restaurant. I have not heard the inventory read; I hear it now. He did not give me possession of the bakehouse or contents. His instructions were not to go out of the restaurant. I did not consider I had anything to do with the bakery. I do not recollect his saying anything about the premises; I have no doubt about it; he told me not to go outside those two doors. My instructions were not to allow anything to go out of the restaurant. He did not draw my attention to any premises at the back.

By Fryer.—You handed me your warrant. I understood you to limit your instructions to the restaurant aad contents; you said nothing about the bakery. I did not consider I had any further charge, as you ordered me not to go outside of the doors of the restaurant. The bakery is detached. I knew it was the property of Mr. Brown.

By the Court. —Bailiff read no inventory, and said nothing about the bakery. I saw one table being taken away by Mr. Allen. I said nothing, and made no remark, considering I had no charge over them.

Cross-examined.—l saw you remove some of the fittings of the bakery. I did not object. K. S. Allen examined.—l am a baker. On the 10th July I bought from Mr. Grant a trough &c., for £3 10s. I removed the trough from the bakery; it is a detached building, three or four yards off. I was aware a bailiff was in charge of the restaurant. The man in charge saw me removing the property, and did not object. Thomas Grant said—On the 4th July the bailiff came in to take possession of the restaurant. I heard the instructions given, which were to take care of what was in it, and not to allow anything to go out of that building. I was not aware he had possession of the bakery. I heard Fryer calling the things over to the man, and he never mentioned the bakery or contents. Cross-examined.—l have a title to those premises. Mr. Brown gave over to me all the buildings that belonged to him. 1 think the bailiff read the warrant. I showed the bailiff the assignment. He first said he would withdraw; he told me to make an affidavit before a magistrate. I could not find Mr. Beetham. I went on to Queenstown, and could not see him. He did not come over here, as I expected he would, before the time of sale/ Re-examined.—l did not remove any part of the inventory. I went to Queenstown to see Brown. I came back. I was then detained by a man dying on the premises, who was buried on Saturday night. On Thursday the premises were sold. Mr. Beetham was expected on Monday, which was fixed as a Court day. The Court.—l have no option but to consider that you have taken illegal possession. You were aware that these goods were the property of Mr. Brown. A distress warrant includes everything. You have not proved your claim to me up to this time. There appears to have been laxity in the instructions of the bailiff to the man in charge. You will have to restore the property. I shall inflict no fine, as there appears to have been a mistake throughout.