SUPREME COURT.-CIVIL BUSINESS.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XVIII, Issue 1054, 17 December 1862, Page 5

SUPREME COURT.-CIVIL BUSINESS.

Thursday, Dec. 11. . [Before Mr. Justice Richmond and a Special Jury.] The QOEEN V. McLkAK.. Mr. Duncan and Mr. Travers were for th« Crown; Mr. Dampier and Mr. Harston for Mr. McLean. The following gentlemen comprised the jury ;—-Samuel Bealey, Esq., foreman, and Messrs. Hargreaves, Heywobd, A. Sheath, W, R. Brown, T. B. Winter, E. B. Bishop, J. Birch, O: H. Qreentsreet, W. Day, R. H. Smith, H. H. Deßourbell and W. Bowler. Thit action in one fofm or other has been before the Courts for eight or nine years, and arose out of the. unsatisfactory laws which have been framed in the colony for the management of the Wwte Land* of the Crown, since the Letters Patent of the Crown iitnd the Act of the Imperial Parliament of 1846 came into force. The' facts are simply these. In 1849 the Govern. : meqt and Legislative Coui.cil of New Zealand passed an ordinance to regulate the Occupation of Waste Lauds of the Crown in the Province of New Ulster) and this ordinance was amended by an ordinance passed in 1851. With this latter law were alio promulgated certain rules and regulations (by the Govar- ! nor. Sir George Grey) for the issue of pastuie and timber licenses. By the former ordinance it was enacted that " ihere shall be appointed a tit number of persons, being justices of the " peace, Who shall be, and be called Commissioners of Crown Lands," and the " roles and regulations" named are especially for the guidance of snch commissioneis. Sir George Grey ia 1852 appointed Lieat.-Colonel James Campbell provisionally a commissioner nuder the ordinance, for this part of New Zealand, and he granted a number of pastoral licenses iu this province; amongst others, two were granted to two brothers, named John and Allan McLean. In 1854 Col. Campbell was removed from office and was succeded by Mr. W. G. Brittan, who issued fresh licenses for those granted by his predecessor, and which had been declared invalid; but in the case of the McLeans no fresh licences were issued, they determining to rely on the validity of those they possessed. Why they were thus obstinate does not clearly appear; but it is geuerally believed that they were aware of special objections to the validity of their titles, and so held on to the licences in question rather than run the risk, by throwing in their defective licences, of giving another applicant pr»cedence of them. In this unsatisfactory ' way they have held their runs, and up to tliis time maintained their right against various legal efforts made to oust them. The question how to proceeed against them seems to have presented unusual difficulties, as almost every Attorney-General of New, Zealand has bad the matter before him. At length in July last year, an . information was filed at Christchurch, by Frederick Whitaker, Esq., Attorney-General, to the effect that 22,500 acres of land comprised in the runs named " ought to be in the hands of the Queen in right of her Crown of England; but nevertheless John McLean, of Morvern' Hills, in the Province of Otago, stockowner, on or about the 12th May, 1855, into and upon the said land entered, intruded and made ingress, and with sheep and cattle depastured the same and has so continned in possession of the said parcel of land until the day of filing this information. Wherefore our said Lady the Queen by her said Attorney General claims to have possession of the said land, and to recover from the said John. McLean .£IO,OOO for damages." To this information, pleas were put in and a replication made which the Judge heard in Chambers. Tbey were withdrawn,

and were followed by fresh pleas, replications and rejuinders; the following are defendant's pleas, which though lengthy we give mi extenso that the case may be understood: — 1. That by an Ordinance of the Legislative Council of New Zealand, called " The Crown Lands Ordinance," passed in the 13th year of the reign of our Lady the Queen, intituled '« An Ordinance to regulate the Occupation of Waste Lands of the Crown in the Province of New Ulster," after reciting that it was expedient to make provision for the management of the i Waste Lands of the Crown in the Province of New Ulster, it was enacted that for the purposes thereinafter mentioned, there should be appointed a fit number of persons, being Justices of the Peace, who should be aud be eallea Commissioners of Crown Lands. 2 That every such Commissioner should be appointed by her Majesty, her heirs, and successors, who should bold office during her Majesty's pleasure; aud that it should be lawful for the Governor to appoint any such Commissioner provisionally, until her Majesty's pleasure should be known. 8. That it should be lawful for the Governor from time to time to make and issue such regulations as to him might Beera meet for the management of the Waste Lauds of the Crown, aud lor the guidance of such Commissioners in their office, and such rules and regulations to make aud alter, as occasion might require, provided always that the rules and regulations so to be made as aforesaid should not come into operation until the expiration of fourteen days after a copy of the same should have been published in the New Zealand Government Gazette; 7. That it should be lawful for any such Commissioner (among other acts therein mentioned) to do any oiher matter or thing which might be expedient on behalf of her Majesty, her heirs, and successors, touching any of the Lands of the Crown, and every act, matter, or thing done or authorised to be done by anynuch Commissioner, should be deemed and taken to be done on behalf of her Majesty, her heirs, and successors, any law custom or .usage, to the. contrary notwithstanding; and by another Ordinance passed in the the said reign jutitiiled, "An Ordinance to amend the Crown Lands Ordinance, No. 1 Session X., and to extend the operation thereof to the Islands of New Zealand," the ,m& recited Ordinance as amended by the now reciting Ordinance was "extended and made to apply to tb<» Islands of New Zealand." 2. That under the powers and authority of the said Ordinancis, certain rules and regulations for the management of the Waste Lands of the Crown in New Zealand, aud for the guidance of such Commissioners were in or about the year 1851 duly made aud issued by bis Excellency Sir George Grey, the Governor of New Zealand for the time being, aud duly published in the mouth of August in that year in the New Zealand Government Gazette. 3. That about the. year 1852 one Lieutenant-Colonel, James Campbell, was, by bis Excellency, the said Sir George Grey, the Governor duly appointed a Commissioner of Crown Lands provisionally for carrying the said Ordinance into effect. Ist plea. Ist part. —4. Now the defendant as to 12,500 acres, part of the land in the information mentioned, and in the plan to this plea annexed (colored red) saith:—That in or about the year 1853, the said Lieutenant-Colonel Campbell, then being and acting as a Commissioner of Crown Lands for the district in which the lands in the information mentioned were and are situated, and then being also Commissioner aud Agent of our Lady the Queen in that behalf, permitted and authorised the defendant by lease aid license to enter into and upou 20,000 acres of laud (of which the aforesaid 12,500 acres are pan and parcel) south of aDd adjoining the Ashburton River, and eastward of a ran by him assigned to Allan McLean, to comprise in one block the prescribed extent, the said lauds then being ! unoccupied Waste Lands of the Crown in the said Province of I Canterburyj for the purpose of depasturing the same; and the I said Jamns Campbell then being such Commissioner for the > said district and Agent of our Lady the Queen in that behalf, did under the powers ot the said Ordinances, and in accordance ' with the rules and regulation* for the time being in force in the ' Province for the issue of depasturage licenses, by a license or ' instrument in writing under his hand, hearing date the Ist day ■ of October, 1853, duly licensed and authorised the defendant to ) depasture stock upon the said lauds for the term of (14) fourteen years from the date thereof, aud which said license is still subsisting, and in the words and figures or to the effect following:—

"No. 82. 5. " Whereas John McLean, of Canterbury, has made appli- " cation for a license to.depasture stock upon 20,000 acres of the " Waste Lands of the Crown within the Province of Canterbury, "of which the following are the boundaries:—South of and " adjoining the Ashburton Riyer, and eastward of the run as"signed to, Allan McLean, to comprise in one block 20,000 " acres, and has this day paid into my hands the sum of .€6 "sterling, I, James Campbell, do hereby license the said John " McLean to depasture stock upon the said land for the term of " 14 (fourteen) years from the date hereof, subject nevertheless •«tn be sooner determined, pursuant to the provisions of the "drown Lands Ordinance, Session X., No. 1, and Crown «Lands Amendment and Extension Ordinance, Session XL, "No. 10, and of tbo regulations under which this license is " issued, and to be cancelled as by law and these regulations "is provided, or by any law or regulations which may be • < hereafter established. Dated this Ist. day of October, 1853. " (Signed) Jab. Campbell, " Commissioner of Crown Lands." 6 That the defendant, by virtue of such lease aud license, entered on the lands in the first part of this plea mentioned, and occupied the same, in so far as was necessary for exercising the riahts and privileges by the said license assured to htm.and he has since continued to depasture the same and to use and occupy the same in so far as was necessary for exercising such rights and privileges. . ' 7. That the said license bas not been determined or cancelled, and is now in full force and effect. ■• 2nd part.—B. And as to 10,000 acres, other part of the lands In the said information mentioned, and in the said plan (colored yellow), defendant nuith that in or about the said year 1853, the said James Campbell then being and acting as Commissioner of Crown Lands for the district in which such last meni tioned lands were and are situate, and then being Commissioner and Agent of our Lady the Queen in that behalf, permitted and authorised the said Allan McLean leave and license to enter into end upon 20,000 acres .of land, then being unoccupied ! Waste Lands of the Crown in the said Province of Canterbury, ! (of which the aforesaid 10,000 acres are part and parcel,) south • of and adjoining the Ashburton River, and eastward of a run by the said Commissioner assigned to Mr. John Hall, to comprise i in one block the prescribed extent, and the said James Campbell then being Commissioner of Crown Lands for the district in ' which the »ame were and are situate, and then being Commis- ' tioner and Agent of our Lady the Queen in that behalf, did by virtue and under the power* of the Bald Ordinance*, and in S accordance With the aforesaid rules and regulations for the - time being in fotce in the said province, by a license or instrument in writing under his band as such Oommissionur of Crown Lands, and bearing date the same Ist day of, October, 1853, duly license the said Allan McLean to depasture stock, upon : tbe'«*id lands for the term of fourteen years from the date thereof, and which said license is in the words and figures or to the effect following, and is still subsisting and Itt full force and K 'ieffeet, .• . . •„."'■•' b'.<..••<•• "No. 81. p- o " Whereas Allan McLean, of Canterbury, has mode appli- » cation to me for a license to depasture stock on 20,000 acres »■: "of the Waste Lends of tbo Crown within the Province of . " Canterbury, of which the following are the boun< ories :-* • •'■South of and adjoining the Ashburton River, and eastward of ; »irt»e ruu i*fign«d<o John Hall, to comprise In one block ■'•' $0,000 aeri*, arid has *U day paid into my hands the snm of ■«*»■ sterling, I, Jam*/ (topta»>4»*wrtv Hwiwb tb« said

" Allan McLean to depasture upon the said land for the terra " of fourteen years from the date hereof, subject nevertheless to< •• be sooner determined, pursuant to the provisions of the Grown •* Lands Ordinance, Session X., No. 1, and Crown Lands " Amendment and Extension Ordinance, Session XI., No. 10, " and of the regulations under which the said license is issued, "and to be cancelled as by law and these regulations is pro- " Tided, or by any law or regulations which may be hereafter "established. Dated this Ist day of October, 1853. "(Signed) Jas. Campbell, " Commissioner of Crown Lands." 10. That the said Allan McLean thereupon entered on the said last mentioned lands for the purpose of exercising the rights and privileges by the said last mentioned license assured to him, and he hath so continued from time to time to depasture such lands, and for that pnrposetouse and occupy the same, and at the time in "the information mentioned, and thence hitherto the defendant by permission of the said Allan McLean, and as bis agent and servant in that behalf, and by his com-. maud has depastured and continues to depasture stock upon the said last mentioned lands, and for the purpose of having and exercising the said rights and privileges, und for (hat purpose only has been and still is in occupation of the said last mentioned land-, as of right he might and ought to do. 11. That the defendant and the said Allan McLean have, from time to time, annually, since the making and issue of the said licenses, to them tendered and offered, and have at all times been and are ready and willing to pay to the Commissioner of Crov.u Lauds' for the time being, all rents, fees, and assessments, payable by the defendant and the said Allan McLean, as licensees of the said rights and privileges, all which the defendant is ready to verify. Wherefore the defendant prays judgment, and that the defendant's said license rights and privileges may be established, and that he may bo paid hia co»ts of suit by the planum*. Ft is not necessary to publish the replications and rejoinder, as they were merely denials to and reiterations of the pleas. The issues for trial were narrowed to; / ' Ist. Wbb the defendant at the time of filing the information \ an unlawful intruder upon the waste lands of the Crown in the information mentioned ? ' 2nd. If so, what damages is the plaintiff entitled to recover? Mr. TbaVJSRB opened the case by stating that the onus of proof to bar the title of the Crown was with the defendant, uot as between party and party in a private suit, where the onus of proof lies with the.plaintiff, to show his right to eject the intruder. The learned counsel, after reading the information and stating the pleadings, said the latter were in effect a claim to occupy the lands in question under Sir G. Grey's regulations of 1851, by a licence issued by Lieut-Col. Campbell,- said to be a commissioner of the waste lands of the Crown appointed by Sir G. Grey. This the Crown denied. , The jury would have to decide first, whether the liceuse issued was in 1 : accord ance with those regulations; and if not what measuro of damages the Crown was entitled to. The evidence would show whether the facts justified the defendant's occupation;- but his Honor would guide them as to the law, they would have to find only what w. re the facts of the case. His Honor wished the course of the inquiry to : be now decided upon. Some conversation ensued between him and the counsel on both sides. Mr. Dampier inclined to Mr. Travers proceeding with what he had to prove, viz., the amount of damages in case of a verdict adverse to his client. But it was ruled that Mr. Dampier should first attempt to prove defendant's lega.ity of occupation, Mr. Travers to reply, and then to

.......-~ D J — rconsider and assess the damages. Mr. Dampikb commenced by admitting the first part of the information, that the land in question was the rightful property of the Crown, but asserted a justification of his client's intrusion upon the same. Here it would be necessary to give the definition of what is legally an " intrusion." (The learned counsel began reading a deAuition from Jacobs' Law Dictionary, but bis Honor oejected that the definition referred to an entry upon an estate after the death of the ancestor, and was not a case in point; nor could he accept Jacobs as any authority whatever.) The question then waß, is it an unlawful intrusion by M'Lean amounting to a trespass? (His Honor: May yon not have legally taken possession, but contiuued unlawfully? You must show the jury you are justified in holding now.) He would show the latter in proving the former. (Mr. Travers took exception to that doctriue, and showed an original entry might be lawful, yet not continue so; but would accept Mr. Dampier's proof of the former as evidence of the latter.) He purposed to show the right of McLean's intrusion by producing the licence of Col. Campbell as a commissioner of Crown laudß under an ordinance of the Government and Legislative Council of New Zealand, and that authority could not be gainsaved, for no other persons than those appointed under that ordinance could deal with those lands. (Hiß Honor: Mere colouiallegislatiou cannot be operative over Crown lands.) If approved by the Crown through the medium of its represent* live it may. (Mr. Travers—lf not conflicting with Imperial law.) The learned counsel read the 7th clause of the ordinance of 1849, as in the Ist part of the pleadings, and referriug to the Uth clause, said that the two combined implied ihat the commissioner had power to issue licenses with such regulations as the Governor might from time to time issue. (His Honor questioned the doctrine.) But surely the ordinance conclusive. (His Honor—l am. not.prejpared to ordinance is legal, or that the Government by passed was competeut to such legislation. I hope the>pou}t?will not be raised.) Who would venture to say that the law «r invalid? (His Honor—We most all accept our IW, but I trust I may not be asked to decide in this Nisi Prius Court upon the validity of Sir Geo, Grey's Act, for the result might be most inconvenient.) At all events, a licence was issued under these regulations, and the construction of the ordinance most be taken by its intention, which was to forward the depasturing of cattle on the waste lands of the Crown. In this instance the Crown was a lessor. Under such powers as were possessed by Col. Campbell as a commissioner, he granted this license. (His.Honor— What application had been made'by I defendant ?) Defendant had applied tor a licence, by, bis brother, and two were granted, under the regulations, ou paying the-ftp* required. Hb proposed to show by the production of the licence itself, that the defendant was permitted to occupy the land; he could show by the notification of C>l. Cumpbtll, published in the newspaper, that the defendant was so authorised; and though he failed to produce the original appli-. cation for the written licence, that notification would be secondary evidence of the existence of an application having been made, and besides would prove a parole licence, making a written licence unnecessary.; (Hiß Honor—You should show thatths commissioner was acting under statutory powers, and within the regulations. I would advise you to read them one by one and shew what you can prove. You should shew the original application and the licence also, and prove that they are within the Regulations.) What could he do? He could not produce the original application, for it had been lost. (His Honor: Why not call the Commissioner ?) He is dead. (His Honor: But the office lives and the licensor's successor is ' custodiau of the records.) Mr. Dampier read the Regulations, 1 and shewed how far his client had complied with them; rei ferred again to what he called the parole license of the news- , paper, which the Court ruled to be no licence at all; and then i produced Col. Campbell's licence, which contaiued besides the i conditions prescribed in the Regulations a provision of the Colonel's in these words "or by any Law or Regulations which may be hereafter established." The latter part, said » the counsel, was not esseutial, referring merely to suggested i alterations never made by the Legislature, and therefore a • mere surplusage not in any way invalidat ng the, esseutial. part ■ of the licence. (This doctrine was denied by both Mr. Travers

aud the Court, and Mr. Dampier vainly strov« to overrule their objection to it, and Mr. Travers not only denied the Commissioner's power to add anything to the form of the licence, but to issue any licence at all without the seal of the colony and the signature of the Colonial or Provincial Secretary.) Mr. Dampier contended that if the Commissioner appointed to administer the Waste Lands of the Crown, and discharging the functions of his office, granted a licence, that instrument would be as valid as.if buaring the seal of the Government or the autograph of the Crown itself; the only thing that could make such a license invalid would be proof of a fraudulent collusion between the Commissioner and the licensee. He concluded by saying he should put in thtt original licence and call evidence to establish the tact of a sufficient application for it having been John C. Boys, surveyor, of Rangiora, was called, and proved that he had been employed as assistant Government surveyor under Colonel Campbell. A number of questions were put by Mr. Dampier as to where Col. Campbell had resided, his being now dead, what had been his chief business, &0.. His Honor said he was ashamed to make notes of such an examination, for the questions asked were not any more relevant to the issue than would be the inquiry "What had Col. Campbell to dinner?" Mr. Dampier came at length to the question, had witness seen at Col. Campbell's office either pr all the McLeans? His Honor: It is no use pursuing such an examination to prove that the McLeans had ma..e proper applications for l.cences. A writt*a application in form prescribed by the Regulation was MwniteVtoitao validity of the licence, and such an application raurt bo produced; or, failing that, it must be clearly shewn to have **isted ami to hare been lost or destroyed before any secondary evidence coilid be taken of its contents. At this point, one of the jurors was sad to *>e s.ck (no wrm.lar! ) and an adjournment took place for 45 minutes. On the Court resuming* Captain Morgan, by consent, was accepted as a juror, in place of Mr. Heywood, indisposed, and rßo^tcalled: Mr. Dampier was proceeding to put Into wUrirt hand the licence granted to McLean, with some IT "f money paid to Col Campbell, and attested by witness, lh. fit - could not be accepted as a licence until the preliminary !it«rionwere proved, nor could the receipt affect the issue, t? P allowed to be put in for'' *orth, and hi. Honor agreed that they • Z il.«rora to by Witness at in the handwriting of Colonel ! cA«ll and'be pafilas three piece- of paper merely, but K not affect the legal aspect of the can. -To Kmpiermust provethat the preliminary tmdjtlpoi had been KeTbyTe defendant befpre the licence of Col. Campbell ould be accepted as within the power. <%^^J£ ££ t *fi hl r ;aSou. h t: ' S ofthe"application .'butby therulings of thCourt he was nonplussed. If he could on y produce, ?L m an . In the hands of the Government he might establish bat part his ca e Mr.' Travers said tbo Crown neither coudKdelreto prevent him .ftou bringing all the evidence be cou°d to justify the defendant', intrusion. If he mapsln r questton would have helped him, why hud not Mr. Dampier . subp«naed the Commissioner with a notice to producethe map.? r Mr. Dampier, seeing the Commissioner in attendance, wo«d ; call him, if the Court allowed, Leave was given, and r Mr. Brlttan wa. asked by the counsel for two [ I sketch »»pf, but he •toted th*t Tie knew nothing- pftctally of

the maps in question, as none had been handed to him by the late Col. Campbell. Most likely the maps alluded to were in the hands of the Chief Surveyor. From their description he supposed tliem to be sketA maps copied from the maps made by Mr. Cass for the Canterbury Association, He was usked by Mr. Dampier if he had noticed the names of the McLeuns on those maps, but the Court ruled that no answer should be given. If that lact were brought out at all it must be by the production of the niup itself, but ho did not see that that would be evidence. Mr. Brittan went down, and Mr. Dampier expressed a wish to call for Mr. Torlesse's sketch map. His Honor thought it was wasting the time of the jury in allowing so much latitude to the counsel, who it appeared had corao into.court to fish for evidence; he might try to produce the map in question, but what earthly good it be he was at a loss to perceive. Mr. Boys recalled—l made a copy of Mr. Torlesse's sketch map for the Crown Lands Commissioner; it was -used when runs were applied for to determine the quantity of land between rivers. There is my handwriting upon those map*. (Hie Honor stopped the next question, which was to elicit what was written upon the maps, and said this was the most unsatisfactory secondary evidence of secondary evidence, and to say the least was a strange mode of trying to establish anything.) Mr. W. G. Brittan was then sworn and examined—.! am Commissioner of Crown lauds, and succeeded Col. Campbell; he is now dead. I have not the original application fur the country in question made to Col. Campbell by John McLean. I have made every search for it in my office, bit it is not there. An application of Allan McLean's was handed over in my time, but to whom I have no evidence to show. I suppose it went into the hands of the General Government. This was the only application for those lauds I ever foaud in the papers of Col. McLean. I had from Col. Campbell some books, but not one called a record. I had a letter-book and memorandum book, in which entries were made of parties to whom ho had granted licences, and of applications for licences. 1 remember Allan McLean's name was.in that list. I (don't remember John McLean's. It should have been gazetted, and I believe it was, and appeared i.i the ' Lyttelton Times.' (Witness was then asked if the. advertisement alluded to, which app.ared in the ' Lyttelton Times,' w .s a transcript of ' what Col. Campbell had written, but this was objected to; nor was the copy of the application made by Mr. Dampier allowed to be put in as evidence.) Witness went on to state the terms on which depasturing licences were allowed to be held in 1851, and the number of sheep required on a run of 20,000 acres. On the run in question three acres were rated to oue sheep. [At the request of Mr. Travers the so-called application of the McLean's was read. The following is a copy— " Christchurch, August 17, 1858, "Boyal Hotel. , '* Col. Campbell, Commissioner of Crown Lands. " Sir,—l beg that you will appropriate to me and to my two brothers, John McLean uud Robert.on McLean, each of us a block of the first country that may become forfeited by the present applicants on the Sonth Bank of the Ashburton River, on which we are now prepared to pnt 1000 one thousand sheep each. . i " I am, Sir, &c, &c, • i " (Signed) Allah McLean."] p The witness was then cross-examined by Mr. Travers—No i other paper relating to any of the McLeans ever came into my possession. I believe there was no stock iu this country on the > south of the Ashburton when I took office. In August 1854, -nrVion T want n«ai> lha iuhhnyfnti nrmntrv »aa .in atn/.lr

j when I went over the Ashtmrton country there wag no stock, there, , nor do I believe there hai> ever been any. I had several conversations with John McLean as to his claim. He j admitted that he had not stocked the country at the time of ; his application, nor at a j eriod subsequent to my taking office. ■ The quantity of stock mentioned in an application for a run would determine the acreage alloted. The • Lyttelton Times,' of October 15,1353, was allowed to be put in as secondary evidence of a licence having been issued . to Allan McLean, and the case for the defendant was completed by reading the original licence to John McLean, dated the Ist October, 1853. Mr. Travers, after what they had heard, thought it was only necessary to ask for damages. Had defendant been plaintiff, as would have been the case in a private suit, he (Mr. Travers) should have moved that he be non-suited, as not having proved uny title whatever to the run, and the court could have done no other than grant his motion. As it was, he would address himself to the question of damages, and call evidence to shew what the amount should be. John Tucker Ford knew the country in question, and said that during the last nine years 22,500 acres would have been worth jr2oo a year for occupation. R. J, S. Harman believed that the run in dispute during the last nine years would have been worth \£\ 000 a year to a person capable of stocking it. (His Honor strove to elicit from Mr. Harman what portion of the jt 1000 might be considered as profit on the capital invested in stock, and what portion as profit on the occupation, but witness said he could not satisfactorily determine that.) " . Robel t hew ton Higgins, a sheep-farmer on the Cast, said that presumiug the run in question to be fully worked, he should consider its occupation would yield Jf 1500 a year. The ; into figures to shew this, stating the average 5 pefr cent,. andV the fleece of the value of ' the "result .named by allowing A(^*£j[r^jte-tfi*' capital employed, and one-third to the~country occupied. This closed the evidence for Crown, and the Court adjourned to Friday, at 10 a.m. (To be continued.) I