Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

Warden’s Court

(Before Warden 11. J. Dixon). The following applications were granted; 11. L. Davis, prospecting license of 24 acres in the bed of Clutaa River. G. S. Harvey and W. Weir, prospecting license over 20 acres opposite Harvey’s residence. W. H. Bell, prospecting license of 20 acres downstream Irom Bell-Hooper. Joseph Bell, extended alluvial claim at Deadman’s Point, 2 acres. D. C. Betts, prospecting license ef 100 acres, Bendigo i old Alt.i mine. G. Frye and E. T. Giddens, pro.;-< pecting license of acres, Cromwell Fhit. V\ mill ed M. Gordon-Glassford, extended alluvial claim, 3 acres, near Roaring Meg. C. L. Betts, special alluvial claim ( 14 acres, Cairnmuir, north of Partridge and Scott. D. Bretherton, prospecting license of 100 acres, north side of Springbnrn C reck. Robert A. Munro, certificate of protection for six months over Bell-Ran-turly Dredging claim. W. J. Ammo, branch race in Section 12, Block XVIII Leaning Rock SD. In view of recent amendments to the Mining Act, about 70 applications were adjourned to December. 'rive applications where as early disposal as possible was requested were adjourned to 21st inst.

Bell and Kilgour v Hooper Bros; This claim for £2OO value of gold alleged Hb bo taken by defendants from plaintiff area was rojieluded the Warden reserving his decision. J. P. Bell and R. J. Bell wore recalled for plaintiff and Mr H. A. ue Latour, manager of Bell-Kilgour Co., also gave evidence for plaintiffs.

The defence called Mr B. T. W. Uwen, civil engineer, who detailed Fns survey of the boundary between the claims made before the area in question was blocked out. Counsel for both parties then addressed the court and his Worship reserved his decision.

Norman v Ironside and Barker; In this case an inspection of the stream m question, at Pembroke, was made by the Warden and Counsel concerned and the ease was further adjourned to December 12th to see if the parties could amicably settle the dispute.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CROMARG19341119.2.21

Bibliographic details

Cromwell Argus, Volume LXIV, Issue 3341, 19 November 1934, Page 5

Word Count
326

Warden’s Court Cromwell Argus, Volume LXIV, Issue 3341, 19 November 1934, Page 5

Warden’s Court Cromwell Argus, Volume LXIV, Issue 3341, 19 November 1934, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert