WARDEN'S COURT LAWRENCE.

Tuapeka Times, Volume VI, Issue 324, 24 January 1874, Page 2

WARDEN'S COURT LAWRENCE.

(Before. E..H.. Carew, Esq., Warden.) Wednesday, 21at January. Wijliam. l^uttal — application for; a dam. No appearance. Abra,h£an BJundeH — application for a h.^ad race. No, appearance. Duncan Campbell applied for an agricultural lease of section 60, block 1., "Waitahuna West,, there being n.o objection, and it, being shown that the ground was non-auriferous, a certificate was directed to be issued on payment of the first half-year'B rent. John Brown applied for an agricultural lease, of sections 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22, and' remaining par^s of sections 23 and 24, block 1,, Waitahjraa West. This application was objected to by Barry and; others, on the ground that the land was.probably auriferous. It appeared that there, are miners at work near thelandappliedfor,and;ii;wa^nofciinfikelythaJ the. gold might run. through. #-.. Mr, Brovm had valuable* improvements on the ground, but admitted that it was possibly auriferous ; as the- ground was too deep, to have it prospecije.di except a* much espense.^ An adjournment was nafc asked for.. Application, declined. Love v. Tlie Bewnotitaaid Tuapeka Water Race Ctompany (Registered:)— This was a fri"noty complaint, charging the- Company mil* haying- neglected to, renew waf.er- licenses numbered 143-1, 1432, 1501, and 1502.. ]^r.. Squires, the manager, pleaded guilty : and said that he had' been recently appointed to that office> and finding-that these licenses had not been renewed, found, on enquiry, that there had been some mistake. T.he rsvee was a subsidised one, and" the licenses had got t into, the handa,of the soUcitor-for the Government. He produced' a writing froa^thafc gentleman, whiph. showed' that he had no objection to. the course.Trfrich Mr. Squfeea asked the Court to. adopt — that s, %o inflict a fine in lieu of forfeiture. Fined 10a., in lieu pf forfeiture,, and 11s. costs of Court. Fmlay Monro applied for an agricultural lease- of sections 51, 52-. and" 52. block Yd., Tuapeka East ; it was objected that » road was. required through section 51, and the application as to>tbftt section w.as witdrawn. A certificate for sections 52 and 53 was directed to be issued on payment ot the first half-year's renfc v