WESTPORT WARDEN'S COURT

Westport Times, Volume IV, Issue 703, 27 August 1870, Page 2

WESTPORT WARDEN'S COURT

2 EIDAT, AUGUST Zb. (Before J. Giles, Esq., Warden.) HT7GITE3 V. OTKEHAGEIT. The plaint was that the defendant, on May 23, obtained a certificate in a race in which the complainant held an interest; that the race had been stated to be abandoned, and was not so abandoned ; that no notice, as required by the Act, had been served upon the holders of the race; and that there bad been a suppression of material facts on the part of the defendants. Mr W. Pitt appeared for the complainant, and Mr J. B. Eisher for the defendants. Mr Eisher objected to the case being brought in the Warden's Court, having been decided in the District Court. Mr Pitt contended that the practical result of the case in the District Court was a non-suit. His Worship thought that it would be desirable to ascertain what issue had been tried before the District Court, and what was the judgment, so as to learn what had been decided. C. H. W. Bowen, Clerk of the District Court, produced the record of the judgment given by the Court, and the Warden reserved the objections, raised by counsel for the defendant, as a question to be decided by the higher Court whether he had power to deal with the case afresh. Witnesses were then called by the plaintiff, whose evidence was corrobo* rative of that given at a previous hearing before the Court. A miner, named Mullett, was also called who gave evidence as to the race having been beneficially used j he stated that at the time of the application being granted he was using the water, and held a miner's right dated May 13. That ho had been instructed to hold the race by Mr Leslie. Mr Eisher contended that, under section 10, and clause 5, of the regulations, the original holders of the certificate had forfeited absolutely all title to the race after it had been abandoned for one month. The evidence of Overhagen and Achilles was taken, who both stated that Mullett did not use the water out of the race, but was working in a creek in the vicinity. John Martin gave evidence, of his having held a certificate conjointly with others, entitling them to take water from the Waimangaroa creek. He had applied for the right in 1867, and had never renewed or transferred the certificate. His interest was vested in Mr Whitefoord as his trustee. By Mr Pitt: The certificate produced I now see for the first time. I was not aware until now that Mr Whitefoord's name was on the renewed certificate, or that there was such a document. I never transferred my interest. The Warden, after hearing counsel on both sides, deferred his decision until Tuesday, the 30th instant.