THE COURTS.

Tuapeka Times, Volume IV, Issue 221, 25 April 1872, Page 7

THE COURTS.

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE.

(Before Vincent Pyke, Esq., R.M., and Alex. Stewart, Esq., JP. Thursday, 18th April. In the matter of Mrs. Reid's child, Mrs. Swannick appeared, and Btated that in January last Mrs. Reid died, after giving birth to a child. She (Mrs. Swannick) being her next door neighbour, took charge of the child, which she had retained ever since. The Bench directed that the child be sent to the Benevolent Institution, Dunedin ; and, that she be brought up in the religion of her mother — the Church of England. Mrs. Lyons was brought np, on remand from the previous week, on a charge of lunacy and discharged. The woman's husband appeared, and intimated his willingness to take charge of the children, who had been sent to the Industrial School. The Bench said the children had been ordered by the Court to go to the Industrial School, and must go there. To obtain the children, Lyons would have to memorialise the Governor, who alone possessed the power of ordering their restoration. John Treloar was charged on information, with injuring a cow, the property of J. Fitzgerald. A number of witnesses were called on both sides, but the evidence possessed no public interest. The Bench remarked that a more petty case never came before a Court, and inflicted a fine ss, with costs of Court. M'Alpbie v. Field. — Claim for £5 12s, defendant's share of the expense of erecting a division fence. Mr Gooday, for defendant, pleaded not indebted. Plaintiff deposed — that in 1869 he erected a fence between his own and defendant's property. He had sent notice to defendant of having done so, claiming the amount due. (Copy of notice sent to defendant produced.) Never got an answer from defendant. Cross-examined by Mr Gooday. — lie was positive that he sent notice to defendant. He had put the letter in the post office, addressed to defendant, who then resided at Alexandra. He had kept a copy of the notice as he knew well whom he had to deal with. The evidence of defendant, given on oath before a Magistrate, went to show that he had never received any communication whatever from plaintiff in reference to the fence. Mr. Gooday contended that the notice was not in accordance with the requirements of the Ordinance, and he would ask that the case might be dismissed. Plaintiff accepted a non-suit.

WARDEN'S COURT.

(Before Vincent Pyke, Esq., Warden.)

Monday, 22nd April.

Murray v. Goldsmith. — This was an action brought to establish the ownership of a head race taking its supply afl a point in the Phoenix Warer Race, at Clark's leasehold, on the leading range between Blue Spue and Wetherstones, and terminating at Walsh's Gully, east side of Gabriel's Gully.

Plaintiff averred that the race was not applied for in accordance with the Gold Fields Ordinance ; and, 2nd, That the race has not had water running through it for a period of 3 months. Plaintiff stated that he had examined the Court records, and had failed to find OUt ally application nor anything else in relation to the race. That the race originally was begun about 9 years ago ; and that portions of it were cut at different times, by different parties, for their own use in prospecting. He had applied to defendant in reference to the race, but could get no satisfaction. Other witnesses were examined, and corroborated the evidence of plaintiff, that water had not been in the race for a considerable period. The defendant's evidence was to the that, when he became manager of the Phoenix Waterßace Company, he received a certificate (produced) for a race 5 miles long, taking its rise in the Phoenix dam, .and terminating near Herbert & Co.'s paddock, near Lawrence. He understood then that the certificate covered the race in dispute as well as the other branch. The race was begun by the Company many years ago, and paid for by the chain. No part of it was cut on shares by parties using the water. The company had often supplied water through it for mining purposes. Mr. O'Leary said that at the original application the Phoenix Company (of Wiiich he was one), agreed that when the race came to the saddle at Clark's hill, they were to take a branch on the Gabriel's side and another branch on the Wetherstones side, and rejoin them at Herbert & Co.'s paddock. At the time of the application, there were no bye-laws in existence for registering water races. Sometime afterwards, when the bye- laws were introduced, they were recommended to post notices on the race. He refused, as it might cause objections. Notices were eventually posted, and there was a notice at the head of the branch now in dispute. At this time most of the old Company had sold out, and the Warden advised that a new certificate be given and the old one destroyed, which was done. The certificate produced is the new one. He could not say how long it was since water was running in the race. The Warden recommended both parties to try and come to an arrangement between themselves. He would allow them 15 minutes for that purpose. At the termination of that period, both parties came to Court and stated they could not agree. Judgment was given for plaintiff, with costs, the right to the race to be granted conditionally on compensation for its present valuo, in accordance with section 5 of regulation xxxi., being made to defendant. The amount of such compensation to be assessed by arbitrators, one to be appointed by each party to tho suit, and the result reported to the Warden by twelve o'clock on Wednesday, the 24tli instant. In the event of either party failing to nominate an arbitrator, the Warden to appoint one on behalf of the defaulting party. Silk and party v. Coxon and party. — Mr. Copland for plaintiffs; Mr. M'Coy for defendants. This was an action brought to recover Ll2 damages done by defendants' water race. According to plaintiffs' version of

th» matter, it appeared that both parties have mining claims, near each other, on Wetherstones hill. — (Certificates prc£ ducecl.) Both plaintiffs and defendants ran water in the same race to a certain point. lit November last plaintiffs commenced to drive a tunnel in their claim. They had been driving the tunnel ever since November. On or about the latter end of March the plaintiffs called the attention of defendants to the fact that their water was flooding their claim, said had, caused a great amount of useless ground to fall in, which would entail unprofitable labour for three or four months. A day or two afterwards the tunnel began to fall in, and was destroyed. The defendants could easily avoid doing the injury, by fluming across their (plaintiffs') claim. The amount sued for did not represent the damage done. On cross-examination by Mr. M'Coy, Silk admitted that he did not register the tunnel, neither did he mark it out as described in the Regulation?, as he thought it unnecessary — trenches live feet long, and pegs from one foot three inches to two feet, were at the corner of of the claim. Bruce, Sutherland, and Wills corroborated plaintiffs' evidence. Mr. M'Coy asked that the case be dismissed, on the ground that the claim had not been marked properly, as the pegs were not in accordance with the Regulations, and cited the case of Labes v. Harris, decided by Judge Gray. The Warden decided that the case should go on. Matthew Coxon was called He said his party were owners of a water race. [ Sometime ago the plaintiffs asked permission to turn the race to suit their convenience. They (defendant's party) had no objection, on condition that plaintiffs turned it back again. The race was shifted back repeatedly without their consent, Tf any damage was done to plaintiffs' claim, it was their own fault, as they had taken away a portion of the timber in the tunnel, and the ground consequently sank. Their trenches were not five feet long, and their pegs were not the proper height. Cross-examined by Mr. Copland — Their (defendants') water may have done them a little damage. Plaintiffs can work their claim though their (defendants') race is running. The Warden remarked that the time of the court was taken up unnecessarily through irrelevant questions being put. He wanted facts and not theories. Mr. Copland and Mr. M'Coy having addressed the bench, The Warden stated he would reserve judgment till Wednesday.

Wednesday, 24th April,

Murray v. Goldsmith. — In this case the arbitrators could not agree — Goldsmith's arbitrator valuing the race at L2O, and Murray's arbitrator at LlO. An umpire was appointed, whose valuation was Ll7.

Silk and party v. Coxon and party. — In this case judgment, which had been deferred, was now given for plaintiffs for L 5 and costs. The Warden delivered an elaborate judgment, which want of space precludes us fro"m giving in this issue. In our next issue it will appear in extenso.