MAEREWHENUA.—Sept. 17

Mount Ida Chronicle, Volume III, Issue 186, 27 September 1872, Page 5

MAEREWHENUA.—Sept. 17

Groat excitement and indignation has for some time past prevailed in consequence of a rumor to the effect that Mr. Jtfobert Campbell had applied and paid for 10,000 acres.of ground, which included a very large portion of the Maerewhenua G-oldfield—as rich, if not richer than any other part of it. Jt appears that upon this ground applied for by Campbell several water races have been constructed at great expense, and that extended claims and other milling privileges have been in existence for years pnst; and, further, that upon the said ground so applied for by Campbell, a large number of important works a*e in the course of construction, all of which would be rendered valueless should the application be granted. At the last Warden's Court a large number of applications for mining privileges were made, it being generally understood that Mr. Campbell had expressed his intention in no way to interfere with mining pursuits. To.the pstonishment, however, of everyone, the very first application was opposed by Mr. Campbell's manager, on the ground of the land having been purchased and paid for by Mr. Campbell. An indignation meeting was forthwith summoned, and delegates at once despatched to l)unedin to represent the matter to the Government. The imporiance of the question in the eyes of the miners may •be estimated when we state that the delegates started on their mission at three o'clock a.m. In connection with this matter we have received the following telegram from one of the delegates : successful. Superintendent sends instructions to receive applications as though no such. person as Campbell existed." "We trust, therefore,,that the perseverence and energy of our Maerewhenua friends have brought what appeared to be a fruitful source of vexation, annoyance,-and injustice to a satisfactory solution.

Anions the applications,which were made (ninety-three in all, the hearing of which occupied the Court till long after midnight on Tuesday, AVednesday, and Thursday) was one for an extended claim of live acres by Ancell and party, which was objected to by John Frater on the ground that the area in question was improperly and imperfectly marked. The objection sustained, the application was refused. Mr Bailey for objector. .Following

j t l >fs was in' anplieation of John j 1 ;-ai"t- itSjtiv sor ;ii ise fwrupr case, for | a:i ex en led eiiim of six acres, cumpriaiug within its ljmits the area that had been reiused to Aacell. The hearing of this application occupied the Court for a Jength of time when, it appearing that the.application was informal, it was refused! Mr Bailey for applicant. During the hearing of this case the objeitors, Ancell and party, despatched two of their number to the claim in dispute, so as to be prepared in the event of Prater's application being refused, to remark the ground in a good and sufficient manner Immediately on the decks ion to refuse the application being given, Ancell and others started out of the Court, and very shortly afterwards a large bonfire was observed burning" briskly upon the high ground at some distance from the township. This was speedily known to be a signal to Anceli's party ahead, declaratory of the sin-cess of their objecti in, and intimating to them to proceed at once to re-inark the ground. Upon the rr-sult becoming known toeapplicant, Frater, proceeded at fulK speed on horseback, with the notice in his pocket, intent upon being the first to ie-inaric the ground and put in an. application. Great excitement prevailed, the applicant.Frater maintaining that he bad succeeded in re-mark ing. the ground before the objector Ancell. The whole proceeding caused the greatest fun.in the township, and obtained for the claim the name of the •' Fiery Cross " claim. A more palpable illustration of " diamond cut diamond " is not often to be met with. We understand-that the matter is not yet settled, and will come before the Warden again at the next sitting of the Court. 29th Oct".

"Warden's Court. (Before H. W. Robinson Esq., Warden.}

Aneell v Frater.—This case was an application to bave certain water race rights held by.the defendant declared forfeited, on the. ground that the works had not been proceeded with in terms of the Goldfields Rules and Regulations. The defendant not having received notice to' produce-his licenses, there was no evidence before the Court as to what rights were held by the defendant. The case, was therefore adjourned till October 29th. Same v. same.— : This case was similar in every respect to the foregoing one, and was' for a similar reason adjourned till the 29th October. In both cases the defendant was represented by Mr. Bailey. Taylor v. Turnbull. —In this case the plaintiff sought to have defendant's share in certain mining properties transferred to him, the defendant having lpft the district without havingmade the necessary" transfer. Withdrawn. Granted. —Nimo and others, water race ; Gr. ii. Taylor, residence area ; J. Frater, extended claim ; J. M'Quade,. residence area; W. T. Smiley, water race ; Clements and Taylor, extended claim ; J. Kyan, dam and two water races; C. Archer, water race; D. M' Andrew and others, water race r M'Cann and others, extension and alteration of water race ; \i. W. Botting, dam and residence area; Kermodearid Keid, protection ; Botting and Lorv, tail race and protection ; Kermode and Reed, dam, extended claim, tail race and dam ; "W T. vSmiley, protection ; Lindsay and Taylor, extended claim ; M'Kenzie and Taylor, dam, protection, intermission of construction of race ; Taylor and others, water race; F. .Laughton, extended claim; Botting and another, extension of water race ; : M'Leod and others, water race ; M'An- ! drew and others, water race ; Donald , M'Leod, extended claim ; Gr. K. Tay- ■ lor, dam ; J. P. A very, water race; ! Avery and others, tail race; ,T. F. Botting,residence area; J. Christopher, extended claim; J. M'Quade; extended claim. A large number of applications were refused and withdrawn.