WESTPORT WARDEN'S COURT.

Westport Times, Volume V, Issue 877, 21 October 1871, Page 2

WESTPORT WARDEN'S COURT.

Friday, October 20. (Before J. Giles, Esq., Warden.) APPLICATIONS.

Jacob Jacobsen and party applied for an extended claim of two and a half acres, situate at Giles Terrace. The claim is bounded on the north, south, and east by unoccupied ground, and on the west by "Watson's gold mining lease. The applicants had been working about four months 'endeavouring to tuunel their claim, but had not been able to do so at present. After driving about 200 feet their first tunnel caved in, and bad to be abandoned. They have since driven a second tunnel about 450 feet, and have 150 feet farther to go before they reach their ground. The surveyor reported that the ground is very wet, and dangerous to work. Considering the amount of labour performed, and the difficulties contended

iwith, he thought they were entitled to he extra ground ; and more especially since most of the ground in the neighbourhood is held either under leases or as extended claims. The application was granted. William Mai main and party applied for an extended claim of two and a half acres, situate at Eochfort Terrace. The ground is bounded on the northeast by Young's gold mining loase, on the south-west by the Boatman's claim, and on the north-west and south-east by vacant ground. The surveyor reported that the party had been working the ground in the neighbourhood for about three years, had driven a tunnel of 1000 feet, and had worked most of the ground to the north-west boundary of the land applied for. ! The applicants stated that the ground was very poor, and they wished to prospect for a richer load, but did not feel inclined to do so for an ordinary sized claim. They also wish to guard against their neighbours, who are gradually enclosing their boundaries, and by so doing would render their tunnel and other works useless. The application wa3 granted. COX V. HUGHES AND YOUNG. This was an action brought by the plaintiff, a miner, at Christmas Terrace, against the defendants, miners, also at Christmas Terrace, to obtain possession of ground claimed under an agreement, which it was alleged was entered into by plaintiff and defendants when working together as mates. The plaintiff contended that under the agreement he was to take up ground independently of the defendants, receiving in lieu of his share a certain portion of ground being the frontage from the head or east end of an old tunnel in said claim. The defendants denied having entered into such an arrangement, and his Worship nonsuited the plaintiff. BAKERS V. BLACKMORE. This was an action to stay the defendant from interfering with the complainant's registered dam and flood boxes situated in the G-erman creek. The priority of the complainants' right having been proved, the Warden ordered the defendant to desist from further interference.