COURTS.

Thames Guardian and Mining Record, Volume I, Issue 224, 27 June 1872, Page 3

COURTS.

POLICE COURT.— Yesterday. [Before \V. Fraser, Esq., R.M.] ASSAULT. Alexander Macdonald, cook at the Thames hotel, Shorthand, pleaded guilty to the charge of assaulting William Rose, the landlord of the house, on the 25th instant. The defendant, it was stated, was under ; the influence of liquor at the time, and j rushed at Mr Rose, seized hold of him, knocked him down, and would have proceeded to further violence but was stopped by the parties who were in the house. Mr Rose gave defendant a good character, stating that he had been for two months employed as cook at the hotel, and had conducted himself well. He (Mr Rose) bad no wisli to press the charge. The defendant was lined 10s and costs. A man in the body of Ihe Court said he wished to make a complaint against the police, but the R.M. raid lie had nothing to do with such a matter, and that the complaint must be laid before the SubInspector. This course the complainant said lie should adopt. «2> WARDEN’S COURT.— Yesterday. (Before W. FRASER, Esq., Walden.) The Dumbarton Castle. J. S. FITCII V. DETER SINCLAIR AND OTHERS. In this case James Sawyer Fitch, of Grahanistown, miner, complained against Peter Sinclair, George Edward Bennett, Thomas Roberts, Thomas Phillips, Win. Henry Wakeman, Robert Thomson, and Robert Lloyd, all of Grahanistown, miners defendants. The plaint set forth that the defendants are the registered owners of a quartz claim near the Waiolalii Creek, known as the Dumbaiton Castle, and that they have neglected fairly to work the same during the entire period of occupancy, and that it has been left unworked beyond the space of one working day preceding the lodging of the complaint. The complainant therefore claims that the defendants be adjudged to have forfeited the ground for non-working, and that lie may have authority to take possession. The defendants did not appear. James Sawyer Fitch, the complainant, deposed : lam a miner. I produce my miner’s right. I know the Dumbarton Castle claim, and desire to obtain possession of it ou the ground of its not having been properly worked by the defendants, who are the registered owners. The claim has not been worked for three mouths prior to the 14th June on which day the complaint was lodged. Henry Hitchens, miner, stated that he was working in the Great Surprise, which is the next claim to the Dumbarton Castle. The latter has not been worked for the last three months, and is not under protection.

F. Burgess, clerk in the Mining Registrar’s office, produced the register of the Dumbarton Castle claim. The registered owners on the 14th July were Peter Sinclair and the other defendants mentioned in the plaint. The claim was registered, under the old Act, on the Bth March, 1871. No defence was offered, and the Court gave judgment for complainant decreeing forfeiture and authorising complainant to take possession. The Court then adjourned until Wednesday next.