RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE.

Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 171, 18 May 1871, Page 5

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE.

(Before W. L. Simpson, Esq., R.M.)

Monday, Mat 15th. 2%% v. Loo Kin and Others. — Claim of damages amounting to LSO, for violation of agreement. Mr Gooday for the plaintiff, and Mr M'Coy for the defendants. After some objections to the deed of agreement between the plaintiff and defendants raised by Mr M'Coy were withdrawn, the case was proceeded with. It appeared that several Chinamen had obtained the right, by a payment ofL4oto Mr Tully, to mine upon a paddock of his in Wethersfcones, which paddock these Chinamen restricted themselves by deed to mine upon under certain conditions. The principal of these restrictions were these, viz. , that they would lay aside the surface soil and carefully save it to a depth of three feet, and as they worked the ground this soil was to be replaced, and the paddock to be smoothed and levelled and the fences preserved. The plaintiff's case was that the Chinamen were not fulfilling their covenant, as they were removing soil and sul isoil from the ground and placing it on Crown Land, from which +hey might not be permitted to lift it, and in some cases emptying the soil into holes from ten to twelve feet in depth, and also into the main creek, where the first flood would carry it away. Not only were they doing this, but they were mixing the soil and subsoil — the latter consisting of gravel — indiscriminately, making it impossible for them to replace it according to thu deed of covenant. They had also broken down one of the fences to the extent of two chains, and cut a head race, the soil from which had all been wheeled away into the creek. | Matthew Tully, owner of the paddock, was called, and his evidence was to the following effect : — He had visited the ground on two or three occasions, when he saw the defendants wheeling tho stuff off the land and depositing it in the main creek and into holes outside his boundary. He found the fence broken down and thrown on Government land. The cattle from the commonage strayed upon the paddock and destroyed a stack of hay valued at L 3, also potatoes and cabbages. The fence would take L 2 10s to reconstruct. There had been no care whatever takn to preserve the soil. He drew the Goverement Chinese Interpreter's attention to the work and asked him to communicate his complaints to the Chinamen and to tell them that he (Tully) would much rather have the matter sattled by arbitration than take it to Court. Mr Blewitt spoke to them, but they gave no heed to what he told them. .On being examined by Mr M'Coy, plaintiff said it would cost L3O to replace the stuff. The Chinamen had paid him L4O for the right to mine the paddock. Thomas Bowes was called, and deposed that he knew the paddock referred to, aud visited it on the 29th April. He found it opened to the extent of 126 feet by 17. The depth varied, but would avf»ra«.je 2 feofc 11 inches. The remainder of Mr Bowes' evidence was confirmatory of Mr Tully's. On being examined by Mr M'Coy, witness said, in some places gravel might be reached at a foot in depth, and in other places at three feet and over. In reply to his Worship, witness stated that he thought the defendants could have made a face with more facility towards the creek, but he could not say where he would have worked it from himself, unless he had seen the ground previously. There was nothing to keep them from putting the surface soil on Tully's ground. Mr Blewitt, Government Chinese Interpreter, corroborated Mr Tully's evidence in every particular. He interpreted fully to the Chinamen all the complaints Mr Tully mentioned, and they quite understood what he meant. The Chinaman in reply to him, said they had done no damage. Examined by Mr M'Coy — Witness did not see the pegs, but he was told by defendant that the fence was within the boundary. Mr M'Coy asked his Worship for a nonsuit on the ground that the defendants had not completed their work. There was no reason to suppose they would not replace the soil. The action, he considered, was premature. As to the fence, it was impossible to mine over all the ground without injury to the fence. His Worship could not grant a nonsuit. He thought from the very careful wording of thj deed that the work of smoothing, the ground was to go on contemporaneously with the mining. He was afraid the .Chinese did not fully understand the deed. He thought the objection of moving the soil from Tully's ground was of little importance so long as it was a place from which it could be restored. He was under the impression that if he had a look at the ground it would be of assistance to him in giving judgment. Two things were clearly laid down in the deed, viz., that the soil had to be restored, and the fences preserved. He would visit the ground to-morrow and lose no time in giving his decision.

Chalmeas v Spedding — Claim, L 5 19s ; for the recovery of- • certain expenses* incurred by plaintiff, caused by attending to a summons of Spedding and M'Lean to attend the R.M.s Court, Dunedin. His Worship gave judgment for the plaintiff. Permission to appeal was granted to Mr M'Coy. (This case was reported in a previous issue of this journal, when his Worship reserved his judgment.) Cox Bros, v Healy, (Switzers) — Claim, L3O. No appearance of defendant. Judgment for amount, with costs of Court. Corporation of Lawrence v T Anderson —Claim, L 5, for rates. Defendant pleaded over-rated. The Magistrate stated that it was too late now to appeal. The case should have been brought before Mr Gray, at the District Court. Defendant said that no notice of appeal had been advertised as hithorto had been done. His Worship said there was nothing ;n; n the Municipal Act to shoAv that it was necessary for the Town Clerk to advertise a notice of the sittings of the Court of Appeal. Defendant stated that his grievances were these : His house had been rated L 5 more than on previous years. He had been rated LlO for a small section, near to which Mr Bastings held similar sections for which he was only rated L 7 10s. He had laid out L 2 12s in improving the section referred to, and had received L 3 for the crops taken from it ; so at that rate it would take 21 crops a year to be an equivalent for the taxation. The Magistrate stated that if he had any power whatever over the matter he would gladly listen to the case, but as he could not assist defendant in any way, he must give judgment in favour of the Corporation. { Mr Holmes, Town Clerk, said that he I wished to make a statement in reply to defendan 's remarksjabout Mr Bastings' assessment, as they were not correct. His Worship would not listen to it. Edgar Davis, on the information of Constable Dunn, was charged with being drunk and disorderly at Waipori, on the 13th inst. He had been in the lock -tip since Saturday. Accused pleaded guilty. • ined 5s and costs, or twelve hours imprisonment. Police v Darton — For allowing two cows to wander in Peel street on Sunday. The Inspector of Nuisances said that he noticed two cows in Peel street on Sunday moruing at 7 o'clock, and drove them to I the pound. Defendant pleaded quite accidental. The Bench said as it was the first offence, and defendant had already been put to expense, he woxild allow the case to be withdrawn on payment of costs of Court. | Pung Shin was charged by Sergt.-Major Moore, with furious riding. Mr Blewitt, Government Chinese Interpreter, elicited from the accused that he was ignorant of the rules. j He pleaded guilty, ancl was fined 10s ] and costs. i