RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Lake Wakatip Mail, Issue 1055, 14 February 1878, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Queenstown, - January 30 th, 1878. (Before H. A. Stratford, Esq., R.M.) Bell v. Harrison—£so damages sustained through defendant's conduct whereby a portion of plaintiff's sheep country was set on fire by defendant's shepherds. Mr Turton for plaintiff, Mr Finn for defendant. This was a long and wearisome case, much of the evidence given in former cases being repeated. Mr Adair gave evidence as to boundaries and produced the record map ; plaintiff as to loss of country ; M'Gregor, the shepherd, as to admission of plaintiff's shepherds and damage done country. The plaintiff's contention was that the portion of country so set on fire would deprive him of grass for two years. The young grass that would now spring up would be killed by the frost and another year after would elapse before it would be capable of giving feed to cattle or sheep. The defendant, on the other hand, denied setting the grass on fire, and if set on fire it was done unintentionally ; that not 50 acres of country had been destroyed. It became evident after the undecisive evidence of M'Gregor that the plaintiff required other witnesses, and Mr Turton applied for an adjournment to produce them as he had made previous efforts to do so.—MiFinn denied that any such efforts had been made and opposed the adjournment. —After a good deal of legal battling the Court settled the matter by non-suiting plaintiff with costs. Same v. Same. —£10 10s for loss of lambs driven away by plaintiff with 331 sheep and not returned. It being 5 p.m. the Court adjourned the case to next day. January 30. Bell v. Harrison,adjourned from previous day." The case occupied considerable time in hearing. The plaintiff was non-suited with costs. Defendant asked for 21s costs upon the grounds that he was an esquire with an income of a year. The Court refused the request stating that possession of money did not create an esquire whose title arose from connection with landed estate and birth.

WARDEN'S C 0 U It T.

Qpeexstowav-January 30, 1878. (Before H. A. Stiatforil, Esq., Warden.)

The applications of a number of persons for land situate on Goldfields reserves and made under the si)tli section of the Mines Act, were postponed to 21st February to allow of a survey.

In the matter of the application of Moloney for the reserve at the head of Shotover Gorge, formerly leased to Carl Nelson for mining purposes, Cooper put in an objection that he was entitled to the same through a prior right. A very interesting point is raised in this case. Cooper, through another, got an agricultural lease for this land. The then applicant would not go on with his claim. The areas granted at that period were limited to 50 acres each holder. Cooper afterwards applied for this ground and a re-survey of it was made. The mining reserve now applied for was then made by Messrs Wright and Millett, Government surveyors. The application of Cooper afterwards to use this reserve for grazing and agricultural purposes- was refused.—The above facts were briefly referred to. At the present hearing Moloney has a prior right to the reserve having marked it out before any other person and applied for same. Mr Stratford said the Court sympathised with the objector's position. He would like time to read up all the correspondence and see the documents connected with the applications mentioned.

Case adjourned to 21st February. Mr Turton for Moloney, and Mr Finn for Cooper. Re Davis and Lynch.—Mining claim applications previously heard. Survey not being yet made the case was further adjourned to the 21st February.

Wm. Duncan—Mining Lease application. Governor lias gazetted notice stating the case would be heard on the 28th February. Adjourned accordingly. Mr Manders for applicant.

Kapatzo v. Lee Kong and others (Moke Creek)—A complaint that the defendants (six in number) had encroached upon a mining right of complainant. Mr Manders for complainant, Mr Turton for defendants. Mr Turton applied for an adjournment.—Mr Manders did not oppose one to next Court day or for a longer period if required, but if necessary' to have an immediate survey executed so as to define the encroachment, if any, as he might have to apply for an injunction. Mr Turton said the Chinese had ceased working the ground.

The Warden adjourned the case, and ordered an immediate survey. H. M'Bride, junr., applied to purchase land at Frankton. Mr Turton objected that applicant had not complied with the Regulations, and was using part of his (Mr Turton',<s) fence. The Court did not care about Mr Turton's fence. It wanted to know how much applicant had fenced in of the 10 acres. Applicant said he had fenced in more than five acres and left road open. The Court would grant the application, but the road must be left open. J. Atley applied for a license for mining re-

serve at Race Course Terrace. Opposed by J. Morrison. Mr Manders, for objector, mentioned that he had twice previously applied for this reserve, but been refused it. He had been promised prior to it if ever thrown open for agricultural j urposes. Adjourned to 21st February. Residence Area—J. Gilbert applied for three acres at Horse-shoe Bend. Applicant desired to purchase. Adjourned to 21st February. February 7th. Davis Bros., gold mining lease, Race-course Terrace ; R. M'Gillivray, ditto, Charleston ; and W. L. Davis, agricultural lease, Arthur's Point, were adjourned till tlie 21st instant for survey and reports. Kapatzo v. Ah Why and others.—The complainant alleged (1) encroachment upon a mining claim at Moke Creek ; (2) damages sustained, £'2o ; and (3) special carnages for loss of time, £3. Mr Turton, for defendant, pleaded not guilty. The case was heard at great length. The complainant's is partially a bed and terrace claim, and the defendants' in the bed of the creek. After considerable evidence of a very conflicting character had been given on both sides, the Warden, who had visited the ground in September last, said he was of opinion that no encroachments had been made ; and that the defendants' claim, being a creek one extending to high water mark on each side of the creek no damage had been sustained. Case dismissed with £.j Gs costs.