WARDEN'S COURT.

Westport Times, Volume III, Issue 515, 10 June 1869, Page 2

WARDEN'S COURT.

In the Warden's Court, yesterday, the Warden gave judgment in two cases which had been adjourned for the purpose of his visiting the ground upon which the disputes between the parties had arisen. NOBMAN T. BrBTOHAM ASQ) AKOTHEE. In this ease, the action was brought against the defendants, proprietors of a dam in G-erman creek, for baching tailings on the complainant', and interfering with his workings. The Warden said it was obvious from an inspection of the ground that the defendants' dam had bached up tailings on the complainant's claim, bnt the defendants alleged that complainant had contributed to the mischief by his peculiar mode of working, and that he was not complying with the rules. The rules relied upon by the defendants were those under clause 12, page 23, of the Regulations, relating to the disposal of tailings ; but it, was quite clear that these rules could not. apply to the mode of working adopted in the creeks in this district where the object is to wash the tailings coming from the tunnel c'aims above. The rules referred to were framed with the express object of keeping a clear channel for the ilow of tailings after they were done with, but the express object of the dams granted in these creeks was to obstruct the tailings in order that they may be washed over again. If the rules in question could be held applicable to such workings they would render all the dams utterly illegal, and such dams as that of the defendants obstructed the tailings much more than that of the complainant. It must be held, therefore, that these rules were not applicable to the case, and the complainant was entitled to a judgment.

m'ieod v. m'maeiam'. Lx t'lis case judgment was given for the complainant, but tl o Warden considered the damages excessive, and gave judgment only for £3 and costs, the defendant being restricted from interfering with the complainant's flood-channel, which the Warden held to be part of his dam. Mr Tyler appeared for the defendants in the first case, and for the complainant in the second case. The Warden disposed, afterwards, of 11 applications for races and dams, 7 applications for tunnels, and 2 applications for special sites or washingstands.