OTAGO PROVINCIAL COUNCIL.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 144, 2 May 1862, Page 5

OTAGO PROVINCIAL COUNCIL.

?" THURSDAY, Ist MAY, 1862. . . The SPEAKER took the chair at .twenty-five minutes after four o'clock, and read the usual form of prayer. MINUTES. The Cleric of Council read the minutes of yesterday's proceedings, which, were put and confirmed. MESSAGE NO. 7. The following message from his Honor the Superintendent was brought up and read : — " The Superintendent informs the House of a correspondence with certain parties for the purpose of extinguishing the license of runs, No. 53 and No. 54, which terminated in the accomplishment of the design. The Superintendent desires an expression of the opinion of the House on the subject, as the amount of public money expended in carrying out this.object was considerable, and •without specific appropriation^" It was resolved on the motion of Mr. DICK that the message just read be taken into consideration. " colonist" in error. Mr. HEPBURN, Chairman of Committees, called the attention of hon. members to an error in the Colonist newspaper, of this date, wherein he was reported to have recorded his casting vote in favor of an amendment for augmenting the salary of the Provincial Surgeon. The fact was, that he had given his vote against the amendment, and in favor of the original motion; NOTICE OB MOTION. Mr. GILLIES gave notice that he would move to-morrow, " That his Honor the Superintendent cause to be placed on the Estimates the sum of LIOOO, for the opening up of a main road in the Akatore district." MESSAGES NO. 6 AND 7. It was agreed, on the motion of Mr. DICK, " That the House resolve itself into Committee of the whole House, for the consideration of Messages No. 6 and 7." The Speaker having left the chair, Mr. DICK rose and said, that as Message No. 7 bore reference to matters prior to Message No. 6, he conceived it would be best to take up that message first; but, as there was a voluminous corres-^ pondence on the subject, he would move, " That the Clerk of the Council read aloud the corresponuence referred to in message No. 7." Mr. REYNOLDS seconded. Question put and carried. The Cleric then read the correspondence in question. • Mr. DICK regretted having had the necessity to submit such a lengthy correspondence, but it was requisite to be perused in order to arrive at a full appreciation of the, merits of the case. In Message No. 7, his Honor the Superintendent had desired an expression of the opinion of this House on the subject of the amount expended in the purchase of runs 53 and 54. The amount was somewhere about £4,500, and that sum had been expended without legislative appropriation. It would be found from the correspondence which had just been read, that his Honor had lost no opportunity of getting the runs as cheaply as possible. He had apparently made every effort to obtain the whole of the runs at Is. an acre ; in one ease his Honor had been successful, and in the other he had failed. He (Mr. Dick) did not'think there would be much objection to the courseadopted by his Honor in the purchase. He would move, " That this Council express their concurrence with his Honor in the course adopted by him for the purpose of extinguishing the titles to the runs 53 and 54'" The hon. member thought that would be the best reply to the message submitted to the House this evening. Mr. CARGILL considered it very undesirable to put the question in this way ; it would be much better to take up the whole subject. The motion which had been proposed formed part of the printed resolutions placed in the. hands of hon. members to night. Mr. DICK denied this assertion. The printed resolutions had nothing to dp with it. Mr. CARGILL said, if the hon. the Provincial Treasurer would put his resolution into an expression of simple approval of the extinguishingment of runs 53 and 54, without entering into the mode of proeeedure, by which that was accomplished, lie would have no objection to it. Mr. HOWORTH could not understand,the objection of the hon. member, to the approval by the House of the course .which had been purssued towards extinguishing the licenses to particular runs. If the lion, member conceived that the course pursued by the Superintendent had not been of a straightforward and politic equrse, he should speak out more boldly ; -but, for his own part, he contended that it was the duty of the Superintendent to guard the public funds, and the House could not fail to see that throughout the whole of the correspondence read, the licensees had set up a claim to which they were not entiled. The only compensation that they were entitled to receive was for the occupation of a portion of their runs—to have the license fee suspended—but they were clearly not entitled to any compensation whatever by the Gold Fields Act. (Cries of question from Mr. Cargill.) The property of the runholders was differently dealt with under the Gold Fields Act, and it was not taken from them absolutely as if it had been wanted for settlement. The Government could not, without acquiring a greater right or interest in the land than merely suspending the licenses for the use of the cattle, convert any part of a run into a, township, or take it absolutely from the runholders, and it became a matter of treaty, and a matter of bargain, between the parties ; in this instance, it appeared to him to have been conducted with a great deal ot care over all the respective and conflicting interests involved. It was the duty of the Superintendent to guard the public purse, and he did not think it would be said that his Honor had neglected, or exceeded, that duty. . It was a matter of debate as to what compensation should be given to the runholders for relinquishing these particular runs ; and he thought that any hon. member, who hud attended to the whole of the correspondence, would see that nothing had been done by the Superintendent that was not fiiir and just to the runholders, and politic in a fair discharge of his duties. He (Mr. Howorth) did not think this House would discharge its duty to the public if they did not agree with the resolutions of approval which had been suggested by the motion, which had his hearty concurrence. He was one of the members of the late Executive Government, and if any act had been sanctioned that was wrong, he, of course, had to bear his fair share of the blame. Mr. CAKGILL defended the position ho had assumed. His desire was to limit the question, and not to enter into general details. If the resolution was intended simply to obtain the sanction of the House to the expenditure of the mon^y, he thought that the Government were bound to put it in the form which would bear that construction only, .and not make it a sort of trap which might eompi-onrise the House to something more. Mr. DICK said the Superintendent desired not pnly an approval of the expenditure, but alse an expression of the opinion of the House on the subject. The approval of the expenditure was one paint, and an expression of the opinion of the House another. He should adhere to the motion. The SPEAKELi understood the motion to stand My itself, namely, whether or not the Superin tendent and his Executive were justified in extinguishing these runs. Regarding the case as an urgent one, and as there wns no time to be lost, he considered that the Superintendent was quite justified in acting as he had done towards the lauds being given up to the Government at once. At the same time, he would mention that the motion had no bearing upon whatever may come afterwards,

Mr. CUTTEN was not prepared to support the resolution of the Government, unless it were to be in the form and of the bearing given to it by the late Provincial Solicitor. He thought the Government were perfectly right in extinguishing the title to these runs ; and if there were any error in tbe transaction, it was that they bad given less than the lands were worth; but, if the House were to approve of the course taken by tbe Government, he, for one, could not approve of it. He did not think it -was fair or just to threaten tbe persons concerned with a proclamation of " Hundreds," to induce them to take less tban tbey, were entitled to receive. He believed the Government had pursued a wiser course by licting as they bad done than tbey Would have done had they resorted to arbitration. Mr. GILLIES said it was the duty of Government to get tbe lands as cheaply as possible, but j according to law. Mr. CARGILL believed that there was in existence a letter addressed to the General Government respecting the proclamation of " Hundreds," and another from the Solicitor General to tbe Superintendent, setting the matter very clearly bel'ore the Government. Mr. DICK denied that tbere had been any correspondence between his Honor and the General Government. Mr. CARGILL considered tbat the Executive were fronting the House in a very unfair maniur. Correspondence had taken place between the Provincial Government and certain parties, which bad culminated in the reference of the whole subject to the General Government in the way of a request that certain "Hundreds" might be proclaimed on these lands, He had perused a long letter addressed to the , Superintendent in which the writer pointed out very clearly bow the law applied on the subject, and he considered that the motion before the House was asking hon. members to compromise themselves, by asking them to give their approval by a side wind, in a manner which would place tiie HoUse ia a very unfair position. Mr. DICK said he had, just now, had placed in his bands the paper referred to by the hon. member for the Western District. He was not aware, until this moment, that such an "attempt bad been made to make such a proclamation. Mr. CARGILL trusted that what he had said might not be taken as affecting, unduly, the present holders of office ; and be hoped that no expression of bis would be taken as applying to the members of tbe Government in their ministerial capacity. Mr. DICK would withdraw his motion, and adopt that of the hon. member for the Western District. Mr. HOWORTH would say, with respect to this question, that it was all along contended by Mr. John Cargill that it was the duty ofthe Government to submit the matter to arbitration. Now, he contended that it was not so. What the Government wanted, was the land, not in connection with the Gold Fields' Act, but for other purposes ; and, therefore, the Government were not bound to go into arbitration; and particularly after the House had come to a resolution that no question of such a character sbould be referred to arbitration. Mr. CUTTEN found in the correspondence' that mention was made of a notification by the Governor, to proclaim 10,000 acres into "Hundreds," and be saw, in another letter addressed by the Superintendent to Mr. Richmond, this passage : " a precise direction of the portion recom- " mended to be thrown into Hundreds, and what " licenses should be suspended, may be seen at " the office of the Land Board." He (Mr. Cutten) thought it would have been a much wiser course forthe late Executive not to ask the House to approve of tbe whole of the proceedings, but simply to ask hon. members to approve of the result ; otherwise, a discussion might be provoked which it was undesirable to raise. Mr. REYNOLDS considered it right to explain that tbe whole of tbe correspondence bad been published in the Gazette. The SPEAKER regarded the Superintendent as being entirely clear of all blame in the matter. The question -.—" That this House approve of tbe expenditure of a sum in compensation for the extinguishment of licenses No. 53 and 54," was now put, and carried withont a division. MESSAGE NO. 6. ~ Mr. DICK rose for the purpose of directing the attention of hon. members to Message of bis honor the Superintendent, No. 6. (This Message will be found in our issue of yesterday.) After the message had been read, the hon. member tben moved that— 1. The Provincial Government having obtained sufficient land in tho present Gold Field, by the extinguishment of the titles of the Licensees ofltuns, No. 33 and 54, for the location ofthe miners, and the depasturing of stock for the subsistence of the same, it is tlie opinion ofthe House that there does not exist any necessity for suspending the license over any portion of auy other runs so affected, except in those few cases where, from the population being concentrated, or where operations as described in the Act with respect to watercourses, are being carried on, it may be necessary to proceed to arbitration over a a very limited area. 2. The House also deems it expedient that the Government should extinguish the title over other auriferous land, unless such should be urgently required for bona fide occupation, inasmuch us it is in the contemplation of the Geiieral Governmont to introduce into tbe General Assembly, by enactment, some provision by which such lauds may be made more easily obtainable for purposes connected with a gold-raining population. Mr. CARGILL opposed the motion, because he held that this Housj should avoid class legislation. Hon. members should not permit a feeling of class interest or anything else to interfere with their deliberations, or bias their decisions. As to the question before the Council, it had been very much complicated, and tliere had been some voluminous correspondence read on the subject, which had occupied nearly an hour iv reading ; and yet - the question was a very simple one. The runholders whose interests were involved in this transaction held their licenses for a certain term of years, and, at tho time those licenses were issued, every effort was made by the authorities of this Province to induce persons to conic and occupy the lands which were then unappropriated : and tho condition was clearly recognised that they should make way for agricultural pioneers. But, a new phase of things occurred in the colony of New Zealand. Gold fields were discovered, first in another Province, and afterwards in this : and it was found that the rights of the runholders were being interfered with, and were liable to beset asidc^ because of a discovery which bad never been contemplated in tbe issuing of the licenses. Circumstances hud arisen which threatened to displace the licensees : and the local Government had taken measures for setting aside and for compensating the holders of them. This was not a question of persons comiug in and taking advantage of the prcsuut Government to squeeze out ofthe public purse a certain sura of money : the effect, had been in some instances, to cut off, at an unexpected moment, what had been the main pursuit of the licensees, and the value whicb bad been sought to be obtained, bad not, in any case, been an excess : and only a fair niarket rate obtainable at the time. He maintained that the licences were entitled to receive every consideration at the hands of the Government, and he considered that they had becu dealt with in a manner anything but fair. The hon. member concluded a long and animated speech by moving the following amendment :— That whereas certain gold fields have been proclaimed in this province which comprise within their limits lands which are licensed for pastoral purposes, nnd, whereas, consequent upon such proclamation of gold fields certain portions of the said lands licensed for pastoral purposes have been so occupied for the purposes of gold mining; nud. whereas, provision is made in the Gold Fields Act for suspending the licenses of pastoral land 3 within the limits of gold fields, and for compensating the licensees for the loss the^; sustain in consequence of the suspension of their licenses for a purpose not contemplated "or nroprovided for at the time of the issue of their licenses, this House is of opinion that the Government is bound to proceed in such cases iv the manner provided by the Gold Fields Act. Mr. HOWORTH observed that if anything ' were wanting to induce the House to affirm th»

resolutions introduced by the' Government^-it would be 'the" terms" of the amendment proposed by Jhc hon. member who bad just addressed the Committee. He considered that the .resolution's.; submitted by die Government were in perfect harmony with tbe provisions of the Gold Pields Act. Mr. GILLIES opposed the amendment. Mr. M'MASTER would support the amendment of tbe lion, member for the Western District. Mr. CUTTEN did not appreciate either the original motion or the amendment, and would recommend that the House take no steps in.the matter beyond authorising the ■ Government to make the best terms they could witb the licensees on the understanding that any arrangement should be made in a liberal spirit, giving the miners so. much ofthe country as is useless to the runholders, and giving tlio runholder fair compensation. He uid not say that tbe Government were bound to give the full market value, but they should award such a rate of compensation as would fortify the runliolder against ruin. He would prefer that the House should express no opinion upon the subject, but he would suggest that tbe Executive be authorised to deal with the question in any- manner that might be considered tbe most judicious, and be felt convinced that the Council would indemnify any reasonable and prudent expenditure in this direction. At half-past six the House adjourned for refreshment; and on resummg, Mr. DICK argued that it was the primary duty of all governments to see that no injustice was done to runholders, agriculturists, merchants, or any one else. (Loud cries of hear, hear.). He adhered to the opinion that every government should, at all times, and in all exigencies, Ibe actuated by sterling principles of justice and equity in all their actions and measures. Mr. McGLASHAN saw no objection to the amendment, provided that the statements contained in the preamble were real iacts. ■•' Mr. HOWORTH trusted hon. members would not be caught by a side wind, and he hoped that the House would affirm the resolution proposed, by the Government ; and that they would not be induced to adopt an amendment wliich appeared ;o liim to be of a Jesuitical character calculated to ensnare the HouseMr CUTTEN made a few remarks and was followed by Mr. MARTIN; after which the Chairman put tbe amendment as proposed Dy Mr/ Cargill; upon wbich tbe Committee divided with the following result: — Ayes—s. ' Noes—-13, Mr. Fenwick . Mr. Gillies M'Master M'Glashan - Healy ■""?f win» Taylor Reynolds Cargill., teUer ";' Kilgour Paterson '•; -•■"■-■ Todd Howorth Cutten Rennie Martin Steele Dick, teller Mr CUTTEN now moved the followmg amendment:—" That the question of the extinction of licenses to Runs, within the Gold Fields be left to be dealt witb by the Executive Government: and tbat the Council authorise the Superintendent to expend such sums as may be necessary to compensate runholders whose licenses may be suspended. ayes. noes. Mr. Cargill. Mr. Gillies. Fenwick. Kilgour M,Mnster. Reynolds. Taylor. McGlaahan. Oswin."'"- Howarth. 1 Healy' Paterson. * Steale Todd. Cutten (teller). Martin. , - ■ - . . Dick (teller). Mr. GILLIES objected to the insertion of the words as introdubed into the amendmeut: but be would agree witb. the amendment, were the Mover to strike out the words—"with a liberal spirit,"— as the hon. member believed their retention conveyed a sneer against tbe Government—tliat they weae capable of anything illiberal. Mr. MARTIN quite concurred in the remarks made by the last speaker. The SPEAKER also gayc in his adhesion to the principle embodied in tbe hon. member's observations in repudiating the insertion of words which he held to be objectionable,

Mr. DICK maintained that the Povincial Council in this country ought to bear a fair share of tho labors, and responsibilities, of the Government : and that, therefore, they sbould support the resolutions which the Government had submitted, instead of adopting the amendmeut—so expansive, and so liberal—but which was not complimentary cither to the Government, or country. He considered tbe members of this House were gentlemen of talent-and judgment; who would act independently on every occasion, and not 111 defence to any Executive that might happen to be in oflice.

The original question was here put, and carried without a division. The Chairman repored progress and the House resumed. The Speaker having taken the chair, The first order of tbe day : " Harbor Loan Bill to be read a second. time" was brought up ; when, . Mr. McGLASIIAN moved its adjournment to Monday next;: as other engagements had prevented him from thoroughly preparing himself for piloting the Bill in committee ; besides which there was, in existence, a correspondence respecting the Harbor endowment Bill of last session not yet on the table of the House, and he was of opinion that the correspondence indicated ought to be presented in tbe House preparatory to the consideration of this question. Mr. DICK seconded. Question put and carried. TRESPASS ORDINANCE, 1862. Upon the second, order of the day being read, " Trespass Ordinance, 1862, to be read a 6econd time, Mr. M'GLASHAN rose and said, that before moving the second reading be wouid state the law upon the subject as it at present held. Members of tbe House were aware that tbis Bill had been formed with a view to prevent trespass, and the injury of private property by miners. According to the Gold Fields' Act, miners .are not entitled to go upon private property for the purpose of mining for gold. There is an undoubted right on the part of the Crown to all gold mines, so tbat the Crown arc entitled to enter upon private property wherever there is gold, for tho purpose of searching for the precious metal. The Crown also retains the right of digging for gold even on private property ; but, by the Gold Fields' Act, no such right is conferred on miners: for, by the-4th clause, it is enacted that every miner's right shall extend to xouste lands of tbe Crown; and by the 29th section it was especially provided that miners, in sinking for gold, shall avoid private property. Such being the state of the law respecting the invasion of private property for the purpose of digging for gold, the lion, member would ask what occasion is there for a new enacts ment ? Now, he would refer the House to the 29 th section of the Act (read). This, clause provides that any person who shall knowingly mine, or who shall employ any person to mine for gold, shall be subject to certain penalties. It occurred; to him (Mr. M'Glashan) that that this enactment offered a loop-hole for the escape of offenders, for it said, " any person mining fer gold." Well, an individual may enter on tho lands of a private party and begin digging, but when he is brought before a Court, he may state in defence, that he was not on the land to dig for gold; in other words, he was digging, but be was not digging ! Now, as tbe individual had not confessed that bis object in digging was for gold, he (Mr. M'Glashan) did not see how the offence could be proved, or the punishment inflicted. That was one reason tor a new enactment. Again, the lion, member thought that the provisions pf tho

Gold Fields' Act Were incomplete, inasmuch as there was 110 "authority for apprehending an offender after he bad been warned. He now proposed,- in the Bill before the House, that the owner should have the power of warning the" individual—rlre?passiug on the invaded property, and, after lie bad been so warned, of apprehending him ; giving him into the custody of a policeman, aud having himj brought before a magistrate. This might bethought a stretch of power, —it might' also be, alleged that it would lead to a breach of the. peace,—to give the power of taking a party into custody : but he (Mr. M'Glashan) was of opinion that it was necessary to confer' such power : and the lion, member was strengthened in that opinion by tbe fact that, in the neighboring colony of "Victoria, such a power is given,—such a law has been established—the law of trespass and injury to private property. At the same time, while such was bis opinion of the merits of this Bill, and while he would recommend that the House should go into committee on it and pass it; be would be disposed to recommend that the execution ofthe law should be confined to the Gold Fields Act until the Government bad expressed their opinion respecting the Bill, if this Council pass it. His own opinion was, that it was necessary to enforce in some emphatic way upon the General Government, the necessity of establishing a law whereby individuals, would be more effectually prevented from committing this Offence then tbey had hitherto been. Upon these grounds, then, tiie hon. member moved that the House resolve itself into a Committee ofthe whole House, to take into consideration the " Trespass Ordinance, 1862." Mr. DICK, seconded. Mr. HOWORTH, was not disposed to throw any obstacle in the way of the present Government; but, on tbe contrary, was inclined to accord tbem every support for protecting the interests of tbis province ; but be .though that, in attempting to pass this Bill, for the reasons alleged by the Provincial Solicitor, that hon, members would be exceeding their powers. '-'•■ Mr. MARTIN expressed a hope that the Provincial Government would remit the Bill up to the General Government, and accompany it with an intimation that, if the General Government refused to affirm the principles, they would, at least, legalise themselves some measure affecting so important a subject. Mining upon private property was becoming a paramount question in this province. The Bill having passed tho second reading, was forwarded a stage ; and, on the motion of Mr. M'Glashan, the third reading was made an order of the day for Monday next. ADJOURNMENT. Mr. DICK moved the adjournmet of the House to Monday next, at 4 o'clock. The Executive had held a sitting to-day, but it was only -for a very short time ; and bis colleagues bad not yet enjoyed the opportunity of reviewing the estimates. Mr. REYNOLDS seconded the motion which, was put and carried. The "House rose at eight minutes after ten o'clock ; standing adjourned to four o'clock on Monday, the sth current. RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. . : Thursday, Ist May, 1862. (Before Alfred Chetham Strode, Esq., R.M.) • Drunkenness. — Tbe undermentioned parties were summarily dealt with in the usual manner; Mary Joues, alias Harriett Windsor, charged by police sergeant Cleary, was fined 205., and being an old offender, was committed to seven days' imprisonment. Thomas Murphy, charged by constable O'Connor; Thomas Monk, charged by constable Percy, aud Patrick Rooney, charged by constable Dormer, were severally fined 20». - "Vagrancy.—John H. Brown was charged by constable Percy -with having been illegally on the premises of Mr. AYebb, at 3 o'clock tiiis morning, and not giving a proper account of himself. The Bench sentenced him to imprisonment for the period of two montlis. Larceny.—Elias Harding was charged on the information of Detective Hitchins with having, on the 21st ultimo, stolen a watch and chain valued at £3 10s., from the person of James Dallies, The prisoner pleaded "not guilty," and was ordered to stand back fbr a few minutes, while the following case was heard. Wilson v. Tickle & Co. — This was" an adjourned case from yesterday, in wbich the plainti James Wilson sought compensation for damages done to the Victoria Dining Rooms by the defendants, in the following sums: damages sustained, £16; Cost of temporary repairs, £1 Bs.; surveyor's fees, as per account rendered, £1 10s., and losses sustained in the business, £1 2s. Mr. Prendergast appeared for the plaintiff. It will bo in the recollection of our readers that this case had been adjourned for the evidence of Mr. Augustus Poeppel, who being now in attendance, was duly sworn. Examined by Mr. Prendergast, the witness slated that he was city surveyor, aud that lie had been brought up as .architect and surveyor. He knew Capt. Wilson's premises, and made a survey of them, he believed, on the 19th March last, but could not recollect how long it was after the damage had been sustained. Witness identified the report given in by him of the survey that he had made. The amount of damage done by the fall of iron on to the plaintiff's roof was as follows—that the tarpauline was cut in several places, rendering it entirely useless. The tarpauline was manufactured of either stout duck or canvas. Some of the cuts in the can-; vas were over a foot square. Witness did not see any ofthe sheets of iron on the plaintiffs premises, but he noticed some on the adjoining house. The length of tbe iron there was about two feet. Witness examined the rafters of the houses, there were three or four of them broken, and one was entirely gone. It would require at least £T6 to effect an entire renewal of the canvas roof and rafters. By the Bench: If the broken canvas were mended, it was the opinion of witness thnt it would not be watertight. Witness's fees in this transaction amounted to £1 lOs. He knew nothing about the temporary repairs. George Hulet; sworn, said, that he resided in Stafford street, and that he slept on the plaintiff's premises the night of the damage. It was a very boisterous night, and some of the iron from the adjoining premises was carried by the wind on to the plaintiff's roof, and tearing one or two holes in the canvas, as well as cutting it all along. Tlie iron lodged on the rafters, one of which was broken in half, ' and another was a little damaged. Witness was positive that the injury was occasioned by the iron falling. Mr. Tickle in his defence, stated that he had personally examined tlie roof, and there -was only one place that he could see where any damage had been incurred ; and that place was a hole in the canvas about 18 inches square. Looking al»ng the roof, he could see if any other injury had been done. That was all h« knew. Bj;the Bench : The building was below the level of the road, and defendant could see quite clearly by standing upon the bank and'looking along. He called as- evidence Benjamin Smith, who- described himself as being a professional architect, and being sworn stated, that he remembered a contractor named Steel reporting to him some time ago, that a sheet of iron had descended upon the canvas roof of plaintiff's premises. Having examined the injuries inflicted, witness was of opinion that the broken canvas could have been repaired in such a manner as to render it watertight. The evidence of Christian T. Heisr was next taken for the defenco, but nothing material was elicited. The Bench ultimately gave judgment in favor of plaintiff, in the sum of £18 18s., together with costs. Mr. Prendergast applied for one guinea ejpenses for Mr. Poeppel, on the ground that he was surveyor for the " great city" of Dunedin. His Worship said he was thoroughly aware of that, but the maximum figure allowed by th« Ordinance was 10s., which sum was awarded. The expenses of Mr. Hulet, commission agent, were adjudged in the amount of ss. Larceny.—Elias Harding was now replaced at the bar, when Mr. Inspector Weldon informed tho bench that a person, three days since had given information te the police of having been robbed ; that a detective officer, from intelligence communicated to him, repaired to the prisoner's residence; and; in the presence of a constaqle asked him if everything on the premises belonged to him. The prisoner answered in the affirmative, and a search was instituted, resulting in the discovery of the property alleged to have been stolen from Dallies in a box in the prisoner's room. The prosecutor in this case was up the country, and Mr. Weldon applied for a remand until his evidenot could be procured. Mr. Prendergast, who appeared for the defendant, opposed the application for an adjournment; or, if it were granted, trusted the bench would accept reasonable bail on behalf of his client who was reported to be a respectable Eerson, and a journeyman watchmaker by trade. The ench consented to take bail in a personal recognizance of £60, and two eligible sureties of £30 each. Robert Hogg and Alexander Beaver, presented themselves as securiti«s; and the further hearing of this +w was remanded to the Bth current,