THE MINING LAW AS ADMINISTERED BY THE GOLDFIELDS WARDENS.

Mount Ida Chronicle, Volume XXI, Issue 1106, 12 February 1891, Page 3

THE MINING LAW AS ADMINISTERED BY THE GOLDFIELDS WARDENS.

TO THB EDITOR. Sik,—-In your last issue appears an effusion over the 720771 de plume " A Lover of Fair Play " on the above subject, which purports to be a reply to mine of the 24th. This inspired effusiou of 4< Lover of Fair PJay " could only have come from two sources, and as the writer admits he was present (which I can well believe) I therefore leave it to the public to guess who this veracious "Lover of Fair Play" really is. And now to deal summarily with his half-hinted innuendos. He commences by making the grave assertion that all the witnesses for plaintiff were interested except one, and the evidence of one side was quite contradictory to that of the other in regard to the damage done by the lons of the water to the grass. By the first assertion it will be seen that he asks the public to believe (such is the inference to be drawn) that because men such as Messrs. Fisher, Aitkenhead and •Jenkins are riparian right holders in respect of this stream, they would therefore deliberately go into the witness box and swear to actual damage done to a grass crop of Mr. Gerkens, which damage could not j possibly affect them one way or the other. I have i only to leave the public at large to judge of such a j base and cowardly insinuation being made against these fhen. As to the evidence of one side contradicting that of the other in regard to damage, I may 1 point out that the evidence of defendants' witnesses clearly showed (for so they admitted upon oath) that they have had no experience in irrigation, and consequently could know nothing about it, and as the whole point at issue in regard to damages hinged upon that one point, therefore their evidence was of little value in that respect. The next strong point raised is that Mr Wilson holds the prior right, and therefore should have his registered quantity in his race. Wilson certainly holds the prior right after letting down two heads, bat not before, as this writer would fain infer. This riirht has been held since 1869 upon that express condition, and plaintiff has bad the right of the water since that period. " Lover of Fair Play " next tries to cast a slur upon plaintiff's son who, he says, was seen going to the head of Wilson's race. This assertion was made hy Wilson himself, and was proved upon oath to be without doubt a deliberate falsehood. The decision was a total and unexpected surprise to all who heard the case, with the exception of the Warden himself and the party who wrote this letter over the 7iom de plume " Lover of Fair Play," and the latter is easily identified. lam surprised, Mr. Editor, that such a "production should have appeared iu your journal; and as the writer does not in any way refute what I have said, I should therefore have treated him with the contempt he merits, but that he had the hardihood to write such a conglomeration of base insinuations against honest men and citizens. I therefore trust that this matter will now cease, as I shall take no further notice of such dastardly and scurrilous effusions by replying through the medium of the public priats.— I am, etc., JUSTICF. Beck 3, February 9th, 1891.