WARDEN'S COURT.

West Coast Times, Issue 53, 5 October 1865, Page 2

WARDEN'S COURT.

(Boforo C. C. Schaw, Esq.) Monday, 2nd Ootobeb.

DIBrUTI3D SECTIONS. Oakos v. Persons unknown. — In this caso thero was no appearance of tlio defondants upon whom tho plain), iff proved the service of summonses. The plaintiff stated that on tlio 23rd ult., in company with Mr Tumor, ho took up tho section in dispute, situate in Sowoll streot, and at the timo of marking off tho allotment no person was on tho ground, nor wore thero any pegs in. Tho defendants, it appeared in evidence, were employed clearing tho • land, but declined to say for whom thoy were working. A plan was submitted, showing tho portion of tlio section. Judgment was givon for tho plaintiff, and au order made for tho immediate removal of tho defendant off the ground. Back.v. Boynon. — Tho picco of ground in dispute consisted of about 21 mchos, situated at tho corner of Beach streot, and tho present case arose from somo misunderstanding existing betweon tho plaintiff and tho dofoudant at tho timo that their respective- habitations woro erected. The Klaintiff, Thomas Back, statod that ho had oon tho holder of a cortain section, situated at tho corner of Beach street, for tho past seven months, upon which ho had built premises which ho was now desirous of fencing in. At tho timo ho commenced to improve tho property, tho defendant had partially built a house which encroached on tho plaintiff's section about 1 foot 9 inches. Ho, tho plaintiff, remonstrated with tho dofondant, upon which ho, tho dofondant, agreed to ro- i move his habitation in the ovont of tho plaintiff erecting a permanent building. Dio timo at length arrived when tho plaintiff docidod upon orccting a substantial tenement, but upon intimating his intentions to tho dofondant, ho was met by a refusal to comply with tho compact originally entered into betweon both parties. Alice Boynon, tho wife of tho dofondant, who appeared on behalf of hor husband, submitted, in dofenco, that tho plaintiff had onoroached 2 feet on tho section at prosont qcoupiod by hor, and that sho did not, therefore, consider that thoro had boon any encroachment on the part of hor husband; sho, however, denied having consontod to romovo hor promises. •' Witnesses woro called for tlio defence, but tho ovidonco elicited failed to substantiato tho defendant's case. Judgment was, thorofibvo, mndo for tho plaintiff, and instructions given to tho dofondant to removo tho obstruction within fourteen days. O'Loughlin v. Aldridgo — Tlio sections (two) in disputo aro situato in Gibson's Quay. In consequence of tho similarity of tho two cases' tho dofondant consonled to allow tho decision of ono to rulo tho decision of tho othor. Mr O'Louglilin, on being sworn, stated that ho purchased tho section (G42), tho first in disputo, on tho 2nd September, and employed Michael Mown and anothor to clear tho ground and resido theroon. Ho (Mr O'Loughlin) had visiicd the ground, ho intent say, f:siiy, and ho hud oltfcya soon Mornn\ tent tlh'i-o, with the exception of tlio day on which Mr Aldridgo nii>r?cod off tinsoction. Ho (.Mi- O'JVnijrhlin) hml soon Moimu cngnjro'l in cli-arnig tho ground, bit ho wiia nii> 01010 «• /wl^Uicr tlio nnn had worked the oiilm ry hours of labor Oi'nofc; nor coi;i:( ho any vrhi'ther or uol lio l"ut bc'ii \vo; v 'dnf( for olhoi* poitios. TUo Wan lon lioro intorpa.cd, r».l rb'<l tiiat if a man ftiirl/ occupied, and in-

tended to build on a section of land held under a business license, there was no low to compel the owner to rloai* that land within a given time. 110 did not. think it was necessary to call any witnesses in this case, ns Mr O'L'oughlin had taken tho necessary steps to havo tho ground cleared and occupied. M'ichaol Moran was, howovor, subsequently called to prove his engagement with Mr O'Loughlin, to clear and occupy tho ground. This witness also stated that ho engaged two men to sleep on tho ground for two nights, but without his knowledge or consent thoy had removed tho tent from tho position in which ho had placed it, and had thereby rendered tho section apparently vacant; tho removal, however, was necessitated by tho water risiug too rapidly for the comfort of tho inmates of tho calico domicile,

Gcorgo Mingay Aldridgo, sworn— l am a contractor. I arrived in Hokitika last Thursday fortnight, and on tho 27th inst. I marked out tho section in dispute for tho purpose of erecting a saw-mill thereon. I commenced to fix my tout on tho ground after having marked it off, whereupon tho last witness camo up and said that tho ground belonged to Mr. O'Loughlin. I did not removo my tent, as I was under tho impression that the ground was hold for speculation only. Two other witnosses was called for tho dofonco, both of whom proved that tho 'clearing of tho ground had not been pro- ' scouted with as much vigour as might havo boon expected, but tho "Warden adhered to his former opinion that thoro was no law to compel the ground to bo cloarod within a stated timo ; ho, thorcforo, gavo judgmentfor tho plaintiff, with costs.

Itogina v. Montgomery. — Tho caso against tho dofondant was that he had failed to reside on tho promises hold by him under a publican's license, to wit, tho Bcndigo and Ballarat Hotel, Rcvoll-street. Mr. South, who appeared for the dofenco, applied to havo tho liconso transferred to thowifo of tho defendant. Ths magistrate, howovor, declined to acccdo to this request unless application were mado in tho usual way ana tho necessary enquirios instituted by the polico. Tho liconso was thorcforo eancollod.

llegina v. Bush. — Tho dofondant was charged by Constablo C. Walsh with having, on tho South Spit, exposed for salo certain spirituous and other liquors without a license. Tho caso for tho prosecution temporarily failed in consequence of tho sorvico of tho summons being incomplete ; but an adjournment was granted to enablo the police to sorvo tho summons "in propria persona." Eogina v. Saul Solomon. — This was a similar chargo to tho last. Tho defendant, it appeared,- had for somo timo evaded tho vigilnnco of tho polico, but (as tho constablo expressed it) they had "nailed" him at last. Tho chargo was fully substantiated, and a fiuo of £5 and costs inflicted.

Hogina v. John Palmor. — This was anothor caso of sly grog-soiling. Tho defondant, Mho had nothing to say in mitiSation of tho penalty, was mulcted in a no of £5. Tho Court thon adjourned.

"Wednesday, Octobeb 3.

Sly Grog-selling. — A chargo of this naturo was preferred by Sergeant Clomonts against a man named Summers, residing in Wharf-strcot, Gibson's Quay. Tho chargo having boon clearly proved, tho delinquent was fined £5 and costs, in addition to tho usual penalty of having his liquor confiscated. 1 Disputed Section. — Body v. King-^-Mr. South appeared on behalf of tho dofondant; tho plaintiff was undefended. Tho section in disputo is situated noar tho Flagstaff; and from tho evidence adduced it appeared that the defendant took up tho ground sovoral wcok's ago, and erected thereon a frame and calico building, which ho subsequently loft. Tho severity of tho woathor had its usual devastating offect upon tho calico, which presented anything but a habitablo appoaranco. Tho plaintiff, boing on tho look-out for a section, was attracted by tho deserted domicile, and for fivo wooks incessantly watched tho arrival of its occupant. Finding, howovor, that tho holder -was not forthcoming, ho took up the section and erected an iron house. Tho defendent not being willing to give up his section, which he considered ho was justly entitled to by virtue of his weatlior-boaten toht, disputed tho right of the plaintiff to tho ground. Tho warden expressed his opinion that the plaintiff was perfectly justified in taking up tho ground, and as ho had erected o substantial dwolling-houso upon it, a verdict for tho plaintiff was returned, with instructions to the defendant to remove the skeleton of his tent.

Disputed Mntcship. — Johnson v. Ross and others. — Mr. O'Loughlin for tho plaintiff, and Mr. South for tho defendants.— This was an action to recover a cortain sum of money (amount not stated) alleged to bo duo fipin tho defendants to the plaintiff as balance in a division of returns from a mining claim situated atTotara. Tlio ovidenso of the plaintiff was given in so indirect a manner that neither head nor tail could be mado of tho case until ono or two witnesses, who wore sumowhat more explicit in their examination thttn tho plaintiff, placed the caso a little more clearly before tho Court. A verdict was givon for the defendants togothor with tho costs of the Court.