HUNTLY MINING PROSECUTIONS.

Auckland Star, Volume XXII, Issue 34, 10 February 1891, Page 5

HUNTLY MINING PROSECUTIONS.

(BY TELEGRAPH OWN CORRESPONDENT.)

— Huntly, this day. The Courb resumed at one p.m. yesterday. Sampson, in answer to the Bench, said in his opinion Tracy and those with him could have escaped if bhey had baken bhe warning given by McLellan. The cap pieces of bhe false sets were nob braced to anything, and no diagonal braces were used on any seb. They would sometimes complete a main seb wibhoub putting up a false one. Henry Williams was the next witness, bub his evidence was rather conflicting, His Worship remarking that he had apparently a bad memory. Ib was evident bhe work of fixing the sots had nob made much progress in his shifb. James Montgomery, son of one of the conbracbors, was nexb examined. He had nob proceeded far with his evidence when Mr Hay drew the attention of the Bench to the lasb witness Williams having made signs to Montgomery from the body of the Courb. Witness then said he had made a mistake, and immediately contradicted the previous statement, and acknowledged having received signals from Williams, bub denied they were the cause of altering his evidence. The Magistrate commented strongly on this telegraphing. Adam Gall, in answer to Mr Hay, said he never beard that Tracey attributed the blame to McLellan for the manner in which the timbering was done in the new dip. He did not hear of a disagreement between Rippon and Tracy, and never told Tom Smith thab Tracy and Rippon had angry words. The Court then adjourned.