CHARLESTON.

Westport Times, Volume V, Issue 848, 10 August 1871, Page 2

CHARLESTON.

UESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT. Tuesday, August 8. (Before C. Broad, Esq., K.M) Ainsworth v. Osborne.—No appearance. Struck out. WARDEN'S COURT. Tuesday, August 8. (Before C. Broad, Esq., Warden.) Poland and party v. Carroll and party.—The Warden ordered that this case shonld bo tried before assessors on Thursday next. Mr Donne applied for a re-hearing in the case Harle v. Hall, which was tried on Thursday last, but the applicatioa was refused by the Warden. APPLICATIONS. Payne and party applied for a headrace, which was granted. Jonathan Harle applied for an area of twelve chains by two chains for a dam at the back of the Grand Stand, Nine-mile Beach. Objected to by Mr Salter, as agent for F. Hall, upon the ground that it would interfere with his registered rights. Mr Shapter appeared for the applicant and Mr Donne for the objector. Mr Shapter stated that the applicant had received no notice of the objection. Mr Donne said he did not think that it was necessary. The Warden held that it was, and if applicant desired it, he would adjourn the application until Thursday. Mr Shapter said that they would go on with the application, tmt if in the hearing he thought proper to apply for au adjournment he would do so. Jonathan. Harle stated: I am the applicant for the dam applied for. I have posted the notices and otherwise complied with the rules. By Mr Donne s«l do not remember Adams applying for a dam at the same place, There is not much drainage. I want it to bring the water from my lagoon* Mr Shapter stated that the site applied for was outside the registered rights of Hall, aud,. therefore, the question arose, could he have a right to anything outsfde of the registered rights. The Warden said that it would entirely depeud upon the facta of the

case, and ho would therefore visit the ground before deciding.

Richard Iliggins applied for a dam, which* was granted. George Harper and party applied for a double area claim at tlio Ninomiie Beach, which was objected to by Patrick Connolly, upon the ground that the claim applied for belonged to him.

The Warden stated that this was a case which should b<> brought forward in the shape of a plaint for forfeiture. Application refused. John Cullon and party applied for protection of a head-race, which was granted. Gillespie, protection for claim. Granted.

It. Green and party, protection for extended claim. Objected to by Dudgeon and party, upon the grounds that the extended claiin was within the boundaries of their leaso, and also that the ciaim had become abandoned by non-uso. Application adjourned, in order to allow objectors to file a plaint for forfeiture.