Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

CORRESPONDENCE.

o A REFUSED APPLICATION.

(To tlie Editor of the Tuapeka Times.)

Sib,— rln case you should not have received a report of an instance of maladministration in the Warden's Court, I forward the particulars for the information of miners in the district, and to show them the very dangerous position they are placed in by the interpretation of our Warden, and by his exercise of groat and extraordinary descretionary power, and I think it will be seen it is high time for us to petition Government for a board of wardens. The case I allude to is that of Vernon's, Tuapeka Mouth, for an extended mining claim, adjoining one he originally held in partnership with Charles Anderson, now bankrupt. J. Herbert, on account of Bathgate, Trustee in Anderson's estate, objected to the granting of the application on the ground that it included part of the claim originally held by Vernon and Anderson, and which Bathgate now claimed for Anderson's creditors. The objector,' J. Herbert, gave evidence, but could not definitely prove boundaries of the claim he claimed any further than that Anderson had once thrown a stone on the spur and said the claim was there. He also asserted it was a two acre claim that Vernon and Anderson originally held together, but the evidence o£ -the certlfic;«.te proved it was simply an extended claim under the old block system. 10. Herbert was al-o examined, but only proved the same fact about throwing the stone. T. Leather, also gave evidence for objector, but he knew nothing of the boundaries of the claim ; he had once worked in it. Vernon and Anderson gave evidence in support of the application, both swearing positively that the new application included the part of the claim formerly held together. The Warden withheld granting the application, and even went so far as, to order Vernon to stop working in the claim, which will incur a great loss, as it throws a man out of work, with two heads of water running to waste. lam &c, A Minek.

Tuapeka Mouth, May 10th.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TT18690515.2.13

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Tuapeka Times, Volume II, Issue 66, 15 May 1869, Page 3

Word count
Tapeke kupu
346

CORRESPONDENCE. Tuapeka Times, Volume II, Issue 66, 15 May 1869, Page 3

CORRESPONDENCE. Tuapeka Times, Volume II, Issue 66, 15 May 1869, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert