WESTPORT WARDEN'S COURT.

Westport Times, Volume IV, Issue 696, 11 August 1870, Page 2

WESTPORT WARDEN'S COURT.

Tuesday, August 9. (Before J. Giles, Esq., Warden.) Andrew Duthers v. William Stocken and William Haines. The plaint set forth that the defendants were in occupation of a claim situate at the German and Caledonian Creek, and were holding a frontage of 180 feet along the creek, the regulations only permitting 120 feet. The complainant sought to be placed in possession of the sixty feet of surplus ground, and stated that the defendants had a claim pegged out of 120 feet, as also a piece of ground adjoining, measuring 60ft., the two frontages were pegged out separately. Witness had asked them if they did not hold more ground than they were entitled to, and, in reply, the defendants stated that they were legally in possession ot 180 feet. The defendants hold a dam, situate forty feet from their claim. By the Warden : I pegged in their dam. The defendants produced certificate of registration of the dam, and the Warden nonsuited the complainant with 40s costs. i GOLD MINING XEASES. Application was made by Patrick O'Toole and others for an area, to be

held under lease, situate at Addison's Flat. There were no objectors, and the Warden stated hi* intention to recommend the granting of the lease. B. C. Eeid applied for an area of 16 acres, at Irishman's Creek, Lyell, for quartz mining purposes. Hunter and party appeared to object to the granting "of the lease. The applicant stated that he was not prepared with any evidence, and only appeared in the absence of Mr Pitt; he also stated that he had not been served with any notice of objections, which he thought should have been given. The Warden also was of opinion that notice of objections and nature of same should have been given. Hunter stated that Messrs Eeid and Munro had both received verbal notice that the application would be heard on the 9th instant, and that he intended to appear as an objector. The reason brought forward for an adjournment was a frivolous one, and only for the purpose of harassing the objectors. Applicant disavowed any desire to cause annoyance. He took no interest in the matter, and only appeared because Mr Pitt was unavoidably absent. The Warden said that the objectors had no legal right as against the applicants for the lease. If, however, it could be shown that the ground applied for could be effectively worked as ordinary claims, and there were parties prepared to work the ground, he would be disposed not to recommend the granting of the lease. Mr Munro, who supported the application as a party interested in the proposed lease, stated that he had not been served with any notice specifying the uature of the objections to be advanced. The objection of Hunter and party, as also a petition signed by upward of twenty miners resident at the Lvell, were read. Objectors and petitioners deprecated the granting of the lease aa inexpedient and unjust to miners who were prepared to work the reef as ordinary claims. Mr Munro said if it was only a question of expediency that was to be decided he was quite prepared to proceed with the matter. The objectors could not complain of any special hardship, as he had served a notice upon them that the ground they had taken up had been applied for as a lease. Mr Hunter said he would be able to prove that the pegging off of the lease had been illegal, and that the applicants had not complied with the necessary form. The Warden thought in that case an adjournment was necessary, as the objections lodged with the Court in no way questioned the legal possession of the applicant. The objection must be amended, and a copy served upon the applicants. The application was postponed till Friday the 12th inst.