WARDEN'S COURT.

Thames Star, Volume XI, Issue 3456, 22 January 1880, Page 2

WARDEN'S COURT.

THIS DAY

(Before H. Kenrick, Esq., Warden.) The Big Pump Jumping Case*

F3ASEE V. IMPEBIAL CBOWN G.M.CO

This was a plaint laid by Colonel Fraser ;:na list the Imperial Crown Gold Mining Company (Limited), to obtain possession of the machine sites'originally granted to John Goodall, known as Goodall's Battery Site, and on which is erected the- Biff Pump and the Prince Alfred battery, on the ground that the company are not the holders of a Miner's Eight under the Goldfield's Act of 1866 t.n'der which the machine site certificate was granted. . ' .

Mr Miller : I appear for the Imperial Crown G.M.Co.

Colonel Fraser : I object to Mr Miller appearing for the Imperial Crown without producing a written authority. Mr Miller: I refuse to .produce it. Judge Jobnstone when hero re the foreshore claims decided it was unnecessary. His Worship : I do not consider it necessary. William Eraser, sworn, deposed—l am a miner residing at the Thames. I produce my Miners' Eight. The defendants are the possessors of a machine license in the Hauraki Goldmining district, held under the Act. of '66. They have neither resigned pr abandoned that right on the registration book of the district. On that ground I claim the site. I wish it to be adjudged that the defendants have no title and that I be put in possesson. I quote the cases Davidson v. Providence G.M. Co., and Eeardon v. Tokatea G.M, Co., both-of which went to appeal. By Mr Miller—l know the site I refer to, but don't know what property is on it. I say that the Imperial Crown are in possession, because they have executed rights of ownership. They have tried to Ist tributes under the site and fenced it in. I saw the sale of the Pump adver-

tised before I entered this action. I waa at one time warden of this district, and as such. I granted the license produced to defendant. I don't know if the license covers part of the machine site. The Imperial Crown hold no other title than that which I claim is not good. The locus in quo is within the Thames goldfield. F. Burgess, Clerk to Mining Registrar, sworn, deposed—l produce the register of Hauraki Gold Mining District. The Imperial Crown G.M.Co. hare not surrendered their license in the Jiegister. The defendants have a right under the Act of 1873. It expires in July, 1880. By Mr Miller: I cannot say if the machine site ia included in the license.

Mr Milldr said that the main defence would be the site was in the license. He asked the Court to take a note that plaintiff neglected to prove the incorporation of the company, also that ha had neglected to say that the site was in the Hauraki district

Col. Fraser said he had distinctly said so.. x .. . Mr Miller said the granting of the license was the surrender of the first certificate. The one title was merged in the other.

Col. Fraser having replied to the objections, referred His Worship to the Rules of the Goldfield Uegulations.

Alexander Aitken, County Surveyor, deposed that the Pump and Prince Aifred battery were on the site. The Thames County Council wei'e mortgagees of the Big Pump property. W. Carpenter, sworn, deposed—That he had been instructed to sell the Big Pump property by auction by the Thames Produce Company in September, and subsequently in December when it was sold.

By Colonel Fraser—l never sold the machine site held by Imperial Crown Company as such. In selling it, I recited the clauses of the mortgage referring to the site.

His Worship then summed up the evidence and gave as his decision that the Imperial Crown G.M. Co. have no title under the Act of '66, but he declined to put plaintiff' in possession as it would be creating a new title under a repealed act. Each party to pay their own costs. Col. Praser gave notice of appeal. BBEACfi OF GOIDPIEID BEGULATIONS.

J. Bennett was charged on the information of the Inspector of Miners' Rights with cutting timber without a license.

Defendant said he had applied for a license to cut timber, but the granting of it had been deferred till after it had been ascertained whether the land on which he wished to cut timber was inside the goldfield or not.

The case was adjourned till the 30th inst.

Court adjourned.