THE BLUB SPUR CASE.

Tuapeka Times, Volume VI, Issue 266, 6 March 1873, Page 5

THE BLUB SPUR CASE.

The Longest case, ever tried in Otago or, we believe w.e are- correct in stating, the colony came to a conclusion at 7 a.m. on Wednesday. Seventeen sitting days were occupied in the trial of the case Clayton and Co. if. Morrison and Co — the jury returning their verdict on the morning of the 18th day. The case would have extended much longer, but both sides did not call- many witnesses they- had summoned. Eleven witnesses were called for plaintiffs and fifteen, fo? defendants — exclusive of a witness examined under commission in Victoria. The evidence was concluded on Monday, at half-past" 10. Mr. Barton occupied the remainder of that day in his address to the jury-, which was capital — the attention of his listeners being; kept to his arguments by apt anecdotes and racy sallies fired off: at intervals. Mr. Macassey commenced his at 10 a.m. on the following *mornJng, and continued speaking till one o'clock. His speech was really an eloquent and able one, telling from beginning to end, and when the learned counsel sat down, there was a spontaneous burst of applause from those assembled in Court, j At

Up, and concluded at a quarter to five. The jury then retired to a private room in the Victoria Hotel, there being no accommodation in the courthouse. During the whole day the courthouse was crowded. At 10 o'clock, the jury returned to the courthouse to ask his Honor a question regarding the law of support. At 12 o'clock, refreshments were supplied, and the jury locked up. "At quarter to seven o'clock the following morning, the jury, after 14 hours deliberation, arrived a verdict, which his Honor received at a quarter past seven. Each day'B evidence, as in the Tichborne case, was specially reported and printed for counsel. The jury cost£2o4, and the total expenses of the trial will probably exceed L 2500, A number of law points have yet to be argued in banco, so that Jt will probably be some time before the case is finally concluded. We regret that our space precludes us from giving the speeches of counsel, and the summing up of his Honor in our present issue; but in our next we will give them fully. -The evidence up to the close of defendants' case, appears elsewhere. The case was well contested from beginning to end. It was one of the fiercest legal battles ever fought — the opposing parties yielding not one inch till fairly compelled to by overwhelming circumstances. To counsel on both sides is due the greatest credit for the manner they mastered the facts and handled their cases. The folfowing are the findings of the jury in the various issues submitted to them :—: — 1. Were the plaintiffs possessed of the gold mining claim in the plaintiffs' declaration mentioned, as in the said declaration alleged I—Yes.1 — Yes. 2. Did the defendants, by mining in and upon land contiguous and near to the plaintiffs' said claim, wrongfully leave the said claim without any reasonable or sufficient support, and cause the same to give way, as in the plaintiffs' declaration alleged ?— Yes. 3. Were the defendants, at the time of the commencement of this action, by their said operations, continuing further to remove the support from the said mining claim of the plaintiffs ?— Yea. 4. Were the injuries in the first and second counts of the declaration mentioned, or any of them, caused and occasioned by the negligent i ' and improper mining of the plaintiffs ?-Yes. 5. Did the defendants wrongfully and without the license of the plaintiffs, take away and remove and oonvert to their own use a large quantity of auriferous earth and gold, the property of the plaintiffs ?—-Yes.? — -Yes. i nd if so, what was the quantity and value of the said auriferous earth ? — As to the plaintiffs' claim, exclusive of Speirs' purchase and alleged exchange — 5000 cubic yards r.t 2s . 6d. , £625. As to Speirs' purchase, 2000 cubic yards at 2s. 6d., £250. As to alleged exchange, 12,000 cubic yards at 2s. 6d., £1500. 6. What damages are the plaintiffs entitled to recover in respect of the grievances alleged in the plaintiffs' declaration ?- - Under the first count I—None1 — None ; under the second count ? — None ; under the third count ? — As stated in the fifth issue. The Foreman stated that the jury while accepting Mr. Adams' survey, expressed their regret that that gentlemen had not followed the written description in plaintiffs' lease. He also stated that the jurj had fixed the boundaries of the exchange and Speirs' purchase as follows : — Speirs' purchase 50 feet along his own line, and 30 feet on Morrison's boundary ; the exchange ground -on Speirs' boundary 8 feet ; 58 feet from peg 85 ; 40 feet on boundary of Speirs' tailrace ; 130 feet on Morrison's boundary ; and 130 feet on the line of cutting.