REEFTON NOTES

Greymouth Evening Star, 12 September 1924, Page 7

REEFTON NOTES

WARDEN’S COURT. (Own Correspondent.) REEFTON, Sept. 12. Before Mr W. Meldriim (Warden), yesterday, the following applications were dealt with: —■ Calliope Coal Mining Company, Ltd., two water races.—Granted. L. Collins and L. W. Kearns, coal lease at Murray Creek.— Adjourned. W. Osbourne, coal lease. Counsel contended that the Department S demand lor £2 per acre ior lent was cessive.-The Warden said he would recommend . that the deposit be £5 (£1 per acre). , W J. Morris, tramway license ■at Larry’s Creek.—Adjourned to Sept. 25. . , AV. J. Morris, certificate of protection. —Granted as from 14th AugAlex McKay, hand-sawing, and splitter’s warrant. —Granted. Thos. Sweeney, hand-sawing ana Splitter’s warrant —-Adjourned for re-. P °L H. Roberts, ordinary prospecting license? —Granted, subject to declara- v tion being filed. . , Robert Smith, hand, sawing and splitter’s warrant. —Adjourned. In D. Moore v. W- J- Morris, cancellation of special site license, Mi Reeves appeared for the applicant and Mr Patterson for the defendant. David Moore, bushjnan, said that the site had not been used for a sawmill. There was an old, condemned engine on the site; there was sawn timber there, but no buildings. There wais a. roadway there. He held an area, but was prevented from using th© track, a

notice being put up saying trespassers would be prosecuted. This was the only reasonable outlet to his area.. In reply to the Warden, defendant said he did not want the area, only the right to go through the land. Herbert Campbell. Crown Lands Ranger, said that the site had not been used for a. sawmill site for about four years. He could not say. tha the defendant had not stacked timber there. There were some thousands of feet of timber there. Mr Patterson, for defendant, made an offer to allow plaintiff the use of a tramway site to bring his timber to the Buller road. He contended that the license was tor a special site. The Warden said the license was headed “sawmill site.” Mr Patterson contended that a. sawmill site could be used for any purpose , in connection with sawmilling, such as workmen’s huts,, stables, etc. Defendant had cleared and grassed' the land, and it would be a severe loss to him to lose the site. , W. J. Morris, defendant,, said he bought the site from Mr McMahon. The" site was used for sawmilling purposes. It had been stumped and grassed; he had 35,000 feet of timber stacked there and w|as. getting Ihe ground ready for a boarding house; it was the only dry ground’ there.. The better way for Moore to get timber was by Yorkey’s track; this was 75 chains' shorter than through his land. He was prepared to allow defendant the use of the tramway site, ho one before had attempted to come through this special site; 40,000 sleepers from the terraces had been brought through Yorkey’s Creek. The boiler had not been condemned; it had been reduced in pressure. . To Mr Reeves : There was no sound reason why applicants should come through the special site. He wanted the site for a boarding house and other buildings. There, was no otheravailable site. The Warden said there was no doubt the ground was not used as a sawmill site. There was power in the Warden’s Court to grant special sites for special purposes. This area must n cnpp.ial nnrnose. Hus

area was applied for the special purpose of erecting a sawmill from which the timber from a. special area was to be milled. The plant had been erected and used and was now disused Another mill had been erected on another special site. The old one was not being used for the purpose applied for. Defendant should apply for the land for the special purpose The Court, however, did not want to inflict a hardship on any industry. He would inflict a nominal fine of £l. The. defence could then apply for a special site, and the exemption of a. roadway could then be allowed. Solicitor s fee £2/2/-, and costs £2/2/- were giant-

ed. MAGISTRATE’S COURT. At the Magistrate’s Court, before Mr W. Meldrum, S.M., Frederick Horwood, for being in charge of an unlighted vehicle after sunset, was convict ed and fined ss, with costs. Thomas Roberts, for riding a bicycle after sunset without a light, was convicted ond fined ss, with costs, similar charges, Joseph Butcher was fined ss, with costs 12s 6d; Martin O’Malley, ss, with costs 13s 6d; E. S. Lockington, ss, with costs 10s 6d. Charles Harris, on a charge of delivering a rifle to a man named Hicks ‘ in Mt. Somers District, pleaded guilty and was fined ss, with costs 7s. In the case State Advances Superintendent v. J. Watt, and J. W. D. McKnight, claim £9 19s 3d, R. Green, P. Coghlan and O. Curtis v. L. Reid, claim £5B 12s 6d, and W. J. Duff v. J. Murphy, claim for 12s 4d, judgment was given for plaintiffs by default, with costs. In an ’assault case, Gibbelini v. Mori, iand a counter case Mari v. Gibbelini, both defendants were fined £1 and ordered to pay each other’s medical expenses £1 2s and £1 Is respectively.