REEFTON WARDEN'S COURT

Grey River Argus, 22 October 1915, Page 3

REEFTON WARDEN'S COURT

(Before T. Hutchison, Esq., Warden)

THURSDAY. OCTOBER 21st, 3915

APPLICATIONS. Blackwater Extended Gold Mining Company, Ltd. (Mr Patterson) Application for certificate of protection over special quartz claim, block XIII. Waitahu S.D.. for a period of six months. — Granted. Thomas Hubert Lee (Mr Patterson) — application for certificate of protection for a period of twelve months over Lord Reading special quartz claim. Wock IX.. Waitahu S.D. Referred to Minister. Sydney Fry and A. W. Mills (MPatterson)— application for certificate of protection for 12 months over special quartz claim situate at Wai-' tahu, section Gsl, block XIII., Waitahu S.D. Referred to Minister. Alexander Saraty and J. J. Michell (Mr Lawry) — renewal of water i'ace far one year, situate at Waiuta. — Granted. Lee Willis (Mr Lawry) — prospecting license over 100 acres, block XIV., Reef ton S.D. —Granted. SUITS. Receiver Gold Revenue v. L. W. Kearns — Claim for ,£ll 16s 3d. Jxiderment by defaut with costs 16s. " BREACH OF THE MINING ACT. Inspector, of Mines v. Samuel Arlow and Adolphus Barry, charged with not using the water spray at the Energetic mine. Both pleaded not guilty. The Inspector of Mines (Mr O. Bishop) prosecuted, and stated that he. visited the mine on October 15th and found both the defendants working a drill without the use of water. He spoke to defendants who said they hod used the spray at some portion of the hole they were boring. They were not using the spray when he entered. The collar of the drill was dry. There was no attempt at com cealment. Had the men not been covered with dust no information would have been laid. Mark Fagan, Workman's Inspector, for the Tnangahua Miners' Union, said that he visited the mine on October 15th. Defendants were working a big machine, boring what was known as a back hole. Two appliances for spraying were in the mine, and one bore evidence of being in use and this was lying on the floor. He saw dust on Barry's hair and also on Arlow's moustache and in his nostrils. The Inspector noted (he depth of < the hole and, when the drill was withdrawn dust came out of ihe hole. Defendant Barry said that he could not deny they were borin.e dry. There was some evidence of water being used. He could Ret dust out of a pass, but not the kind of dust that, he saw on Arlow. Joseph Bollino. mine manager of the Energetic Mine slated that Arlow and Barry were employed putting in a set of timber at the end of the pass, and they could contract a lot of dust trom there when removing the timber. Witness saw the drill withdrawn, but being back about eight fert could not see the dust. He saw Atlow drop the hose in order to shift the bar. Adolph Barry, defendant, said that there was no dust lying about anywhere on the occasion of the inspector's visit. The hole was about six feet high. Arlow was working the machine for the first time!-. Defendant had been 14 years on this field. Samuel Arlow said that he was etching all. the dust. The spray w;is dropped only for a minute. He attributed the dust to be from :he timber. The Magistrate held the charge p-oved, and fined Barry £3 and wsts and Arlow £2 and costs.