CHARLESTON.

Westport Times, Volume V, Issue 829, 24 June 1871, Page 2

CHARLESTON.

» (fhom ottb own cobbespondent.) DISTRICT COURT. Wednesday, June 21. (Before His Honour Judge Ward.) His Honour, in taking his seat apologised for not appearing in judicial costume, explaining that he had beeu obliged to travel overland in order to hold the sittings of the Court on the day appointed. Weston v. Johnson. —Mr Home appeared for plaintiff, and Mr Shapter for defendant. Mr Home stated that this case had been tried by Mr Warden Broad, and afterwards by Assessors, from whose decision this appeal was made. Weston held a prior right to a water-right in a creek at Red Jacket Terrace, Brighton. The Assessors, although recognising the prior right, still took it upon themselves to allow Johnson to supply Weston with water, their decision being that defendant was to place a gauge box to measure defendant's water.

, Mr Home called Buckley Weston to give evidence, but Mr Shapter said that at the former hearing of the case the evidence tendered by plaintiff was in the Warden's notes, which had been accepted by consent, and as this was a re-hearing of the case, that was the only evidence that could be heard. Mr Home stated that he was not present when the case was heard, and was not aware of the fact, but agreed with Mr Shapter that no evidence could be heard but that produced at the former hearings. Mr Warden Broad was called, and produced his notes taken at the first and second hearing of the case. The Judge asked what amount of water would a right like the one produced entitle the holder to ?

Mr Home said that they claimed forty inches of water under the old Regulations, and he would submit that there was ground for an appeal, as they were made subservient to a right of a later date.

Mr Shapter addressed for defendant, and raised several points, showing that all parties were infringing on the Regulations in consequence of not allowing a sluice-head of water to flow down the creek, as they were required to do by the rules, and also stated that the intrinsic value of the property in dispute, he believed, was very slight. His Honour agreed that all parties had been trespassing on the rules. Judgment allowed for plaintiff, in consequence of the Assessors not having taken the proper means to measure the water. Appeal allowed without costs, and re-hearing by the lower Court directed.

M'Grath and party v. Ward and party.—Mr Shapter appeared for plain, tiffs, and Mr Pitt was to have appeared for defendants, but from some unexplained cause, he did not appear, in consequence of which it was determined that Mr Broad should states case to be argued by counsel before the District Court on Friday at West* port.