CHARLESTON.

Westport Times, Volume V, Issue 832, 1 July 1871, Page 2

CHARLESTON.

WARDEN'S COURT. Thuhsdax, June 29. (Before C. Broad, Esq., Warden.) M'Grrath and party v. Ward and party. This case came on again for hearing before assessors, and was a decree for a plaint of forfeiture, on the grounds that defendants were not lawfully in occupation of the ground. Mr Shapter appeared for plaintiffs and Mr Pitt for defendants. The following assessors were sworn: —W. Gr. Jackson, M. Jones, M. Murray aud J. Keyes. Mr Shapter, having opened the case, called the following witnesses who again gave evidence :—Thomas Robinson, John M'G-rath, William Brummetc, William Ward, P. S. Deinpsey and Thomas Sexton. Mr Pitt declined to call any evidence, Messrs Shapter and Pitt having addressed the Court at length for the plaintiffs aud defendants respectively, the Warden submitted the following issues to the assessors to which their finding is attached: .Ist. Did the defendants, or any of them, mark out on ordinary claim of three men's ground on the lGth January at Mount Pleasant ?—Yes. 2nd. Did, on the same date, two of the defendants mark out ground and apply for it as a gold mining lease including a portion of the ordinary claim pegged out?— Yes. 3rd. Were the three persons, namely, the defendants, on the ground, or persons representing them, for 7 consecutive days—from the 16th January last between the hours of 9 a.m. aud 12 noon, for two consecutive hours?—No evidence to show to the contrary. > 4th. Have the three defendants fairly worked the claim during the entire period of occupancy—from the 16th January to the Bth day of February ?—No.

sth. Did the defendants apply for registration of a shoot or tramway, as required by section 6, page 20, of rules and regulations?— No. 6th. Was one of the defendants, Robinson, after the 16th day of January, engaged in working at the machine in putting through auriferous earth from other ground than the claim in dispute?— Yes.

7th. Was the tramway nearly constructed before the claim was pegged out at air?— Yes.

The assessors found as follows : Although forfeiture has actually taken place, we beg to recommend that, considering the peculiar circumstances of the case, a monetary fine, as provided by section 115 of the Goldfields' Act, be substituted which would meet all the requirements of the present case. Signed—W. G-. Jackson, Michael Murray, Johu Keyes, Meyrick Jones. It was agreed to argue to-morrow whether forfeiture be declared or a

monetary penalty be inflicted ; and, if the latter, the amount. The case was watched with much interest during the entire time of its being heard by a great number, and it was not coneluded until 7 p.m.