SUPREME COURT, LAWRENCE.

Tuapeka Times, Volume VI, Issue 265, 27 February 1873, Page 5

SUPREME COURT, LAWRENCE.

Tuesday, Februaey 24. His Honor took his seat 10 a. m. John Christie, minei\ residing at the Blue Spur, examined by Mr. Chapman — I have lived at the Blue Spur for five years and a-half. At present I am looking after the reservoir of the Tua- ! peka Water Race. In 1 868 I was em- ! ployed in Livingstone find Co.'s claim. I remember the Perseverance Company firing a blast that year. It was the beginning of winter. The blast was put in the side of the face towards Morrison and Go.'s olaim. It was separated from Morrison and Ca's by a cutting. (Drew a diagram showing the workings, a cut going into the face, and the place where the blast was fired). T helped to charge the tunnel for the blast. The ground was strong blue cement — about 60 feet deep. The face was very steep. The ground near Morrison and Co.'s was strong and unshaken. The length of the main drive was 45 feet.' One of the cross drives was 15 feet, and the other 25 feet. The shorter one was towards Morrison's. The cutting was in that part of the Perseverance nearest to Morrison and Co. There was 1500 lbs of powder, in one, and 200Q lbs. in another. I was in Ledingham's ttore, within three hundred yards of the place, when the shot was fired. The shock was severe — the heaviest 1 felt on the Spur. Everything upon the shelves jingled together, and some light things fell off the shelves, I observed the ground after the blast in passing, but made no close examination of it. I saw the ground all in motion, as if it were an ant hill. The shot was a very good one. - Cross-examined by Mr. Macassey — I think the ground was in motion for weeks. I was living at Munros Gully at the time. The blast of 1868 was the strongest ever fired on the Bhie Spur. Ido not recollect anything of Hales* great blast. I do not recollect any remarkable blast since 1868. In stating that the quantity of powder used was 35001b5. I was only saying what was current rumor on the Blue Spur. I will not undertake to swear that there was more than 28001bs used. I will swear that the main drive was more than 35 feet long. I never measured, and I never saw it before I went over to put in the powder. I was 13 hours putting in the powder. I can give no idea of the distance between the tunnel and Morrison & Co.'s claim. Mr. Morrison is my overseer, and Cormack and Nicoll are interested in the Tuapeka Race. I have not visited the ground recently. Be-examined — When I went to tamp the drive, William Evans took ■me through it. The length of the tunnel and quantity of powder deposited in it, were freely canvassed by the men at work. Robert M'Ciintock, miner, residing at Switzers, examined by Mr. Chapman — I formerly resided at the Blue Spur. I commenced to live there 10 years ago. 1 left it about 6 years ago. I w.as a shareholder in the Perseverance Co. lam now in no way connected with either plaintiffs or defendants. I remember the Perseverance Co. wishing to take a tail race through Miorriflon & Co.'s ground. I .first spoke- to Clayton^ who said that being connected with both chums, he would rather I would speak to some of his mates. This was in the end of 1864, or beginning of 1865. O/ne of xny mates then went to Morrison and got a piece of ground, giving a piece of ground in exchange. The man who negotiated the exchange was Lawrence Henderson. The Perseverance Co. sluiced away a part ofHhe ground ob-

I tamed from Morrison & Co., and then worked another portion of their ground. (Marked line of exchange on plan.) Speirs purchased a corner of the Perseverance Co.'s claim. The distance between the original boundary of Speirs' purchase and the line of exchange was a chain. The piece of ground given by the Perseverance Co. was larger than that given by Morrison and Co. {The size of the piece given by Morrison and Co. was thirteen yards. We gave them more than they gave because they obliged us by a!» lowing us to come through their ground. The Perseverance Co. could not have worked their ground in any other way except through Morrison's claim, without great labor and expense. As the Perseverance Co. deepened the cutting the earth slipped into it. The red cement from the Perseverance claim was falling in. The slipping was all the better for the Perseverance, as they J were getting more stuff away with less labor than they would otherwise have to employ. We blasted the opening of the cut. The weight of the upper stuff falling down afterwards crushed the stuff below, rendering blasting unnecessary. I was at work on the cut about 3 months. 3 men were generally employed upon it, and 140 inches of water used. The stuff carae in very quick. One week the stuff came in faster than we were working. The result of that week's woi'king was 4 ounces. During that week 3 men were atwork4 days — 2 men the remaining 2. Eor the last three months the Perseverance Co. worked in the cutting, they got 30 ounces. That would not pay for water and wages. I remember having a conversation with William Evans in Dunedin, about the time of the G-yinpie rush. Something was said about the exchange ground. Evans asked me how much each claim gave and received in the exchange. Last winter I again saw Evans at Switzers. He talked to me about the exchange. I told him that the Perseverance Co. gave a chain of ground for 13 yards, I remember the letter produced. The conversation was before the date of this lotter. Ido not recollect when I signed plaintiffs' lease. I have examined the Perseverance Co.'s ground since I came from Switzers. Cross-examined — I lost my share in the Perseverance Co. It was mortgaged to Herbert and Co., who took it. I do not know whether my share has passed to Evans. I think it is about five years ago since I first saw Evans. It was about the time of the Grympie rush. If I had put myself to trouble I could have given Evans an answer. I never told Evans that I remembered nothing at all about the exchange. I did tell Evans something about the boundaries. If I told Evans anything, I must have told him to the same effect as lam telling now. I would not be so particular in private conversation as I would on my oatiu I saw Evans at Switzers last winter. He did not come in a straightforward way. He said he camo after a man that owed him some money, but began to ask questions. I found out very soon wLat he meant. I told Evans that the Perseverance Co. had given a chain of ground to Morrison and Co. I bad told him the same in Dunedin, but I made no complaint of his troubling me. (Letter from Evans to witness read.) I did not answer the letter, because I considered it foolish that Evans should ask again for informatiou which I had previously given. I have not been at the Spur till last week for six years. I went up with Cormack and a lawyer, and stopped with M'lntosh. Eegarding the exchange, I swear that Morrison and Co. received a chain for 13 yards. I measured the ground off. I was away at the race when the sale to Speirs took place. I remember it, because I got my share in the purchase money £2. The ground was pegged, but Speirs was always encroaching. The corner pe* was at that time standing in a piece of red cement. Speirs had a tailrace. He worked away the piece of laud purchased from the Perseverance Company, and, I think, he worked more ground. The cutting was made for two purposes — one of them to act as a boundary line> and the other to open up the ground. It was first intended as a main tailrace, but as the stuff came down, it was decided to work it in the oi'dinaiy way. The returns from the cutting were greater than from any other portion of the claim. The depth of the cutting was 10 feet good. There was not a bit of it that was not more than 3 feet deep. (Explained by aid of map) I do not recollect that Clayton was manager of Morrison and Co.'s claim. I remember that when making the cutting Clayton would not let us put the stones alongside the cut on Morrison's ground. I spoke to Clayton as my own mate. I_ never asked Clayton's permission, as manager of Morrison's olaim to> throw the stones from the cutting on to the small piece Morrison exchanged. Clayton never refused that permission. I never sent Larry Henderson to ask permission. Ido not recollect, after Henderson's interview, seeing Clajtonin the presence of Henderson and M'Laren. The stones placed on Morrison's ground were broken up. Henderson and M'Laren worked in the <ml with me for a time. (Explained on map.) I had a garden- when- I was on the Spur. There- was a peg in the garden. It was in before I took up the ground. I believe I was the first to occupy the

ground. The peg in the garden was not one I pegged off the boundaries of my residence area with. It was put in before I took up the garden. It was a square peg of Baltic quartering — not manuka. I cut off a piece of it to make a candlestick. • By Mr. Barton — The peg beloged to Mouat and party, I believe. I asked Mouat's permission to grow potatoes. The peg produced is either red pine or birch. I did not tell Evans when he came to Switzers anything about Speirs' and Docherfcy's tailrace. Evans asked me,tlie distance the exchange line was from Speirs' boundary. We began below and made the cutting up the hill. The work begun in Morrison's ground and ended in oura. I did not know at the time that Clayton was manager of Morrison and Co.'s claim. The reason the Perseverance Co. discontinued working the land they got from Morrison & Co. was that the ground in their own claim was coming down so fast that they had all they could do to keep it clear. The ground given by Morrison is hard poor ground, and good deal of it remains unworked to the present day. W. D. Morrison, miner, resident at the Blue Spur — I have been living at the Blue Spur ever since the ruch to Grabriels, with the exception of a few months at the Teviot and the Dunstan, and two years I was in the timber i trade at Lawrence. I am as old a resident as there is on the Spur. Clayton, Nicoll, M'Kenzie and myself pegged out a claim, which now forms part of Morrison's claim. Two or three months afterwards the Perseverance Co. was taken up. Clayton, Nicoll, Fenton, and myself took it up. I was not present at the pegging out of the Perseverance, or of Morrison & Co.'s claim. I never on any occasion pointed out the original pegs to Adams. I was never present when anyone pointed out the original pegs Adams. I have no recollection of seeing Adams before he came up to survey plaintiffs claim. (Application of Clayton & Co. dated 23rd March, 1864, for a lease of four acres of ground put in ; also application dated 23th June, 1869, for 2 acres of ground of Morrison & Co.) There was a road at that time running over the top of the Blue Spur. The acreage did not include the road. Mr, Macassey objected to the witness giving evidence to the contents of a written document. Mr. Barton here read the gold mining regulations referring to leas- | ing, and contended that the questions were perfectly legitimate. He afterwards said he would not press the point. Examination continued — The road way only exists in small pieces, and is impassable. (Copy of lease put in). The first recollection of the ground that I have, is, that the ground was cracked up to Speirs' boundary. A small landslip had apparently taken place before the ground was worked. I knew the true position of peg 85 better than any of the other pegs. I remember Speirs applying for a lease and objecting to the j granting of jMorrison and Co.'s claim. We gave Speirs 21 feet of ground, from peg 83, running down to peg 12. He had a right to take a tailrace to the eastern boundary. When we bought out Speirs, he had worked the ground away. He worked it sometime in 1865. Peg 85 disappeared during those workings. The ground was very loose and slipping then. The first that mentioned to me about an exchange, was Clayton. I was not working in the claim at the time, but only occasionally visited it. The Court adjourned, and on resuming at 2 o'clock. Examination continued — I did not jump a claim behind Clayton's back, nor did I take up a claim in which Clayton was not admitted as a partner. Fenton took up what is now • Morrison and Co.'s claim, and gave me a share in the application. M'Kenzie hud a share in Fentou's application, and pnrchased a share in the Perseverance Co. from me for one shilling. I did not prevent M'Kenzxe's name from being on the list of applicants for the Perseverance. Adams put his peg 85 to the north of Speirs' tailrace, further in on defendants' ground. Speirs tailrace may be over, bu it is not under 24 feet on our claim. Clayton first spoke about the exchange, telling me that he would like to worktheportionofthePerseverancenexfc Speirs, as where it was being worked was not payable. He said he would not like to do it, as he was interested in both claims. Clayton said he should try to get a tailrace through the corner of Morrison's claim. I was appointed afterwards by the other shareholders in Morrison and Co.'s to see what the Perseverance Co. wanted. I went down one morning and met Alexander M'lntosh, the manager of the Perseverance claim, I think M'Kenzie and several others were then all the Perseveranceshareholdersexcept i Glayton. We went over the ground along the line of the exchange they proposed. We put in. a flax stick at the lower end, a peg at the middle, and and a peg at the top at Spoirs'' boundary. This line was as straight as it could be made. After the exchange was made, the Perseverance immediately commenced operations. They had previously been cutting up a tailrace through the two men's ground. Six or eight months elapsed before they brought the tailrace through Morrison & Co..'s claim. They sluiced

away the cutting. They worked -the same as if they weie working for gold. They sluiced away part of the triangle. I furnished the data upon whirh tin contour sketch were fonstruered to Mr. Irvino. The data I furnished were correct. The Perseverance Co. in the course of their cutting, fired off j small blasts, consequently throwins: stuff down on Morrison & Co.'s claim. Alexander M'lntosh asked me to come and see how I was satisfied with the cutting. I and M'lntosh put in a strong square peg, and I remarked if the Perseveranre Co. worked to that peg there would be no dispute. (Showed on photograph the line of cutting.) The peg or point up to which the Perseverance Co. worked, was more than a chain distant from the true position of peg 85. The plan produced shows the line of exchange that I have described. In 1868, Adams came up to survey. I was working in the claim, and some one told me that A<3ams had arrived. (Shewed on photograph Speirs' tailrace). We have used Speirs' tailrace as a head lace for years. The heap of stones shown on the photograph, is from Speirs' workings. Peg 85 ought to be 24 feet to the south of Speirs' tailrace. Adams stuck in a flax stick into a lump of cement north of Speirs' tailrace. He said that was our" boundary. The flax stick was Bor 10 feet from Speirs' race. When I accosted Adams, only William Evans and Thompson were with him. I told him that he had placed the peg in the wrong position, that that was not the boundary of the claim. I said I would send for Speirs, which I accordingly did. When he carae, he said the peg put in by Adams was not the boundary. Speirs went to a heap of stones, and pointed alongside of it, saying, "There's where the peg ought to be." Nicoll and Cor mack were there, in addition to those I named. I never knew the length of plaintiffs' boundary from pc^ — to peg 85, until this action was commenced. I believe there was a peg at the corner of Speirs claim before Adams' visit to the Blue Spur. That peg was near the dam —within twenty feet of it. I have taken notice of it. The ground where the dam stood is now worked away. The ground on which peg 16 stood, is washed away. Adams said, "There is where I put it, and I don't care for anybody." A rather warm discussion took place, we wishing to get the peg in its true position, and Evans and Thompson wishing it to remain where Adams had placed it. A fight ensued that night between Spiers and another man on account of the peg.- On the same occasion, I spoke to Evans about the exchange. I never saw Adams on the Spur previously. I worked in my claim in 1867. I think it impossible that any one could come to my claim or Clayton's dining working hours without my knowing it, unless I was away. I never heard of Adams surveying on the Spur in 1867. The first interview I had with defendants was when I waited upon Clayton in March or April, 1872. I came to see whether he would give anything for the ground he had taken from the Great Extended Co. at the dam, and Morrison and Co.'s ground at peg 16. The next conversation I had with defendants was in reference to the negotiations between Clayton and Nicoll, regarding the exchange of the laud marked landslip for a piece given by Morrison. I and Clayton had some hot words on the matter. I accused him of wanting to make a rise out of us. In March. 1871, I was carrying on business as saw miller and timber merchant. That conversation reported to have taken place in March, 1871, must be incorrect, as I have no recollection of it. The Bth March, 1872, is about the time I returned to the I Spur. I did not admit designedly | working plaintiffs' ground, nor did I promise to go the upper face. We had no ground at that time on the upper face. I never entered" into the "verbal agreement alleged by Clayton. It would bo impossible to get into Speirs' claim without blasting, the ground is so very hard. I never heard of an agreement not to use powder to the left of plaintiffs' tailrace till we got into Speirß' olaim. The Perseverance | Co. had not a tailrace near there since Grieve left. I can see no reason for such an arrangement. I had a conversation with Margetrs and Evans in September, 1 872. We went to [ point out the boundaries. I showed them the boundary lino at peg 13 ; also, the line of exchange. I showed the end of the line from peg 13 down to the footbridge, telling them the line ran in that direction. They said they did not believe me, and began to use offensive language — Evans so much so that Margetts had to caution him. Nicoll and Cormack were also there. In Evans' house we had a conversation. I marked on a tracing the line of exchange. Margetts said '■ That's quite different to what you showed us on the ground." Margetts. Evans, Cormack, Nicoll, and ravself were there. I said Margetts must have made a mistake. I was under tin impression at the meeting th.it Margetts had made a mistake the previous- day. I made no mistake ; and did not say I had at the interview.- I never told Margetts that Speirs bought 2 1 feet of the Perseverance. I told him that Speirs had got 2-4 feet of Morrisonand Co.'s ground. The line did run from peg 13 towards the "footbridge, in cpnsequeß.ee. of a purchase made by mje.

of the two men's ground. I repeatedly told plaintiffs that it was useless to go ta law. I offered to refer the matter toGrieve as arbitrator. I referred themto Speirs, Dooherty, Grieve, M ; Clinfcoek, Clayton, and IW -Kenzie. Margetts said that night that Clayton denied the exchange in toto. There was a conversation on the ground the following day. In order to remove any misapprehension Margetts might entertain, we got a tape line and measured from peg 85a to making the distance 72 feet. This was to show him the line of exchange. I am quite sure the ground was measured by Margetts and Nicoll. Margetts said when I showed him the exchange, that no jury would believe that such a large piece of ground had been exchanged for such a small piece. Margetts appeared satisfied that he was right. Previous to plaintiffs' Wast in 1868, there was a large crack in the front of the dam, which necessitated fresh walls three or four times. The ground was slipping to the south. The ground was slipping towards 85 to 85a, but was pretty solid about 16. There was a red cement face. There was a cutting at 78, which ca~re round and opened out at 85. This was between 53 and 85a. One or two small shots were fired to make this circle. J*know wl.ere the position is in plaintiffs' claim where the large blast of 1868 was fired. (Position marked.) I am not certain when the dam and the races came down. Shortly after the 1868 shot went off the whole hill began to move. From the shape of it, it was impossible for the blast to bring away the face. 'The powder took effect in the" hill, flying up the seams. The date Rosa left the claim was December, 187 L From peg 1 6 to 85a a face had been opened. The water used to overflow and come through the crack and seams of cement into Morrison and Co.'s tailrace. We knew where the water cam© from, because when the Perseverance Co. suspended work the. water shortly afterwards ceased to flow. The ground was one moving mass. A very short time afterward — 6 or 8 months — houses belonging to Fulton and Barclay had to be removed. The dam is between the two houses. In a horizontal direction, I think, Fulton's house will be 500 feet from the blast, and Barclay about 300 feet. At their houses the hill would be 250ffc higher than the blast. The blast ciused them to be removed. The blast affected land further away, (Showed on photograph " soapy seam.") I have tried to walk up this stuff on a wet day, but could not da so. The soapy seam seems caused by landslips grinding up the hard stuff So far as the dip of the strata is concerned, the fall is into the defendants' claim. If the support from the back is removed, the ground will fall into defendants' claim. The angle of the dip is about 35 degrees. I believe the plaintiffs* blast of 1868 shook all the ground around. From peg 16 to 85 the dipis to defendants' ground. If our ground was worked, the ground mentioned would inevitably falL in. I have been trying to get the claims amalgamated for some years past. Margetts has been opposed to amalgamation. Plaintiffs shifted their race in 1868, and U3ed it in its altered course till I left the Blue Spur. It was taking down ground intoour wofkings. and we objected to. the water getting into our tailrace. We were obliged to get a man to watch th& face. The coming down, and cracking of the ground" were caused by the blast, and the water running over the ground. (Pointed out on plan the position of the tunnel and cross drives). The powder in the southern cross driveought to bo in the position of peg 85. With the large quantity of powder they used, plaintiffs, should have, previous to their blasfe> 'broken away one end of the arch. The blast, defendants put in could not affect the boundaries of neiabboring claims, a& it had an open face all aroumk There is a great difference in the effect of/ blasts fired on the reef; awl blasts fired in the middle of the- cement. The shot defendants put in- was nearthe reef. The effect of a blast fired on the reef is to lift the stuff. Whenplaced on the body of the cement, a. blast works down and all around. Theshot fired by defendants would not damage plaintiffs' ground. lam o£ opinion that had the water been? kept off the ground it would not have l slipped. If plaintiffs' claim- were solid,, it would have stood in spite of the blast r The ground was solid when we put in our tunnel. Ido not know of any of the original pegs now existing on the Blue Spur. I think i+ rather improbable that Adams found the original positions of the pegs. I never agreed directl} or indirectly to Adams' survey. (Memorandum of sale and lease "of Speirs' claim produced). 1 i*ever authorised Adams to alter the surveyof Speirs' claim -when I applied, for a renewal of the lease.. I have seen Adams*" plan ofthe re-survey-of the Blue Spur, but I never-examined* it. Neither Mr. Adams, nor- acy oneelse, pointed' out the serious, alteration the re-survey made. I never knew of' any alteration in the survey, till this, action was commenced. lam not awarethat there is any alteration now, as I have never taken notice of Adams' alteration. To shorten the casp, Mr. Barton and 7 Mr. Macassey entered into an arrangemeut'regarding the conversations.^ The Court adjourned till 10 aja.. oa. W,edn.osda£«-