WARDEN'S COURT, MAORI POINT.

Lake Wakatip Mail, Issue 168, 7 December 1864, Page 5 (Supplement)

WARDEN'S COURT, MAORI POINT.

December 1. (Before Justyn Aylmer, Esq.) Connelly v. Truman —This was a disputed title to the Stony Creek Race. Peter Connelly, sworn, said that he and Truman had been partners in general business at the Point, as well as in mining matters ; and especially so in constructing a race from the head of Stony Creek to the Racecourse Terrace. Some time ago three men left the party for a new rush; and three others, finding that, as witness and Truman could not continue furnishing provisions, had also thrown up their shares; when a dispute having taken place, he and Truman on the 11th of November appointed Messrs Weaver and Malaghan, of Queenstown, to be arbitrators between them, and a dissolution of partnership was decreed. At the examination before the arbitrators, Truman said that he would not give a shilling for the race property. It was therefore abandoned by all parties concerned, and on returning from Queenstown to Maori Point witness took up the race on his own account by posting the necessary notices, and intended working and completing the same. He had only taken these steps a short time when he found that Truman had applied to the Court and obtained a registration of the property. ITe therefore sought to have said registration cancelled; and called— Mr Malaghan, who stated that he was one of the arbitrators, and remembered hearing Truman say that he would have nothing to do with the race ; or words to that effect.

| Cross-examined by Truman—Don't remember the words used by Connelly concerning the race, but believe that he expressed the same sentiments with regard to having nothing to do with it as you did. Henry Truman, sworn, said he was a partner with Connelly at one time, when they jointly owned a one-fifth share in the race. On the Ist of November had a disagreement with him and determined on dissolving the partnership, at which time the three men who could not continue working for want of "tucker" came and made witness a present of their three shares (agreement produced) which three shares represented the full title to the whole of the property, after the dissolution. The three men who left for a new rush had forfeited their shares. It was under this title that he now claimed to be legally in possession of the property. With regard to his saying before the arbitrators that he would have nothing more to do with the race, he referred only to the interest he and Connelly jointly had in it prior to their disagreement and dissolution. Case dismissed.