THE COURTS.

Mount Ida Chronicle, Volume XXII, Issue 1117, 2 May 1891, Page 3

THE COURTS.

THE" WARDEN'S COURT, NASEBY. Tuesday, April 28, 1891. (Before S. M. Dalgltesh, Esq., Warden:) VIIKOBS. The following applications for mining privileges i were dealt with : Patrick Fennessey, protection for 40 days for claim in Home Gully, owing to want of water.—Granted. Sue Hoy and Sue Hang, extended claim of 2a. situate between Pokedown Gully and Cape Stiff Flat; also tail-race in Pokedown Gully.—Granted. John M'Kay, water-race commencing in Idaburn Creek and terminating on the south; slope of Rough Ridge.—Granted. Elizabeth E. Baxter, residence site of la. situate at Wet Gully, at present in the occupation of Robinson Baxter.—Granted. In the matter of Lung Shun long's application for an extended claim situate in the cultivated paddocks of Messrs. Anthony O'Connell and W.-J. Plummer, which. was adjourned from last court-day, his" Worship stated that he had visited the ground, and, however much he might sympathise with the objectors, he was of opinion that he'had no option but to grant the application without awarding compensation to the present occupiers of the ground.—Mr. Rowlatt asked that the applicants should be ordered to save the soil for the objectors; but his Worship replied that he could not see his way to make an order to that effect. He thought, however, the Chinamen should assist the present occupiers as much as possible, for it was rather hard for the latter to have the land taken from them after expending so much in its cultivation ; but it was very clear they had no legal title to the ground, and therefore the application would be granted.—Mr. Rowlatt then asked that a reservation should be; made giving the objectors leave to remove the soil-a course to which Mr. M'Carthy (forthe applicants) consented—and his Worship expressed his entire willingness to do this.

R. R. Hore, James Hore and J. T. Geddes applied for a right to divert four Government heads of water from Homo Gully at a point about one mile above Mr. Mackenzie's fence.—Mr. William Kerr (who appeared for the Mount Ida Water-race Trustj objected to the granting of the application on the grounds (1) that the Trust have spent the sum of .£l5O in forming a channel in the centre of Home Gully to facilitate the discharge of tailings; (2) that the effect of granting the application would be to cause the tailings to silt up in consequence of the water being diverted from the channel.—Mr. Kerr said he was certain that if the application were granted the mining industry would be considerably hampered. Home Gully was the general outlet for the discharge of tailings from workings extending over a large area of country. If the water were diverted the silting-up on adjoining lands would render the Trust liable for damages at the suit of the occupiers. He would also point out that the water was absolutely necessary for carrying the tailings away, as there was no natural water in the gully, and the Trust had to rely on water put in the gully artificially, aa it were, for flushinjithe tailings.—E. Wood, manager of the Mount Ida Water race Trust, deposed that the first intimation he had of the application was through the columns of The CHnoxiciiE, and ha immediately served a notice of objection on the applicants. Home Gully was used forthe discharge of tailings, and he had been informed that there existed an actual tailings reserve two chains in width the entire length of the gulty. The point at which it was proposed to divert the water was within the reserve. The Trust had expended the sum of £l5O in the formation of a channel to carry the tailings down the gully. Most of the water'in'the gully was discharged from the tail-races of miners. Taking the water applied for would cause the tailing* to silt up, as there was very little fall in the gully. Miners irere gradually working down the gully, and the diversion of the water would cause a deposit of tailings on the ground which would probably prevent its being worked. The tailings would also encroach on 3ther people's property. He had received general instructions to object to applications such a? the present.—ln cross-examination the witness admitted ;hat the matter had not been brought before the memsers of the Trust, and he had not received special nstructions to lodge an objection to the application, jut had taken steps solely on his own responsibility is manager for the Trust. (His Worship here renarked that he thought Mr. Wood's action in objectng was certainly wtthin the scope of his duties.) He lid not know of his own knowledge that the channel u Home Gully was constructed by the Trust, but had jeen iuf ormed by his predecessor (Mr. Johnstone) that luch was the case. He had never seeu the plans of ;he tailings reserve, but he understood such a reserve lid exist. He lodged the objection before he saw the :xact spot at which it was proposed to divert the vater. It would he quite impossible to take water nit of the gully without hindering mining operations. Sometimes there might be 20 heads of water running lown the gully, while at others there might be lone at all. The average would probably be seven or 4ght Hogburn heads. The Extended Company and he Hit-or-Miss Company occasionally disoharged a ittle water into the gully. Witness would object to he diversion of even the smallest quantity of water. -In answer to Mr. Kerr, witness said that in handing iver control of the property, the late manager speciled the channel as being a portion of the property. Jhe time when applicants would probably require "to livert the water was the very time when the supply ,-ould be short and every drop would be absolutely lecessary tor carrying the tailings down the gully.— teuben Hore, one of the applicants, deposed that he rasa farmer and had resided at Home Gully for 12 ears, previous to which he had worked at Naseby as . miner for many years. There was very often a trcnendous quantity of water running down the gnlly, t being sometimes six to eight feet widn and four or Ive inches deep. He was of opinion that there was onsiderablc fall in the gully, and tins opinion was trengthened by the fact that the channel made by the Trust was originally cut only spade-deep, while in ilaces it was now seven or eight feet. Although they lad applied for four heads, applicants would be coiient with a grant for a lesser quantity. They would irobably only require it for two or three months in he year, and perhaps no more than two or three lays per week during that period. Applicants would irobably 6tore the water in one of the blind gullies, so hat it would not be necessary to travel two or three niles to turn the water on and off. Witness had had

15 years' experience in managing tail-water, and he cave it as his opinion that the diversion of the water I would not make the slightest difference to the discharge of tailings, a 9, even if they did slightly silt up, the first shower of rain would render the channel the same as before, a 9 the tailings were very fii.e. The nearest claim being worked was two or'thri'C miles above the point of the proposed diversion.—ln crossexamination by Mr. Kerr, witness admitted that the dryßeason was the only time when there was little water in the gully, and any diveision of the water would diminish the power of the colly for earning tailings. The object of the Trust in constructing the channel was to provide a freer flow for thi- tailings. There was n tailings reserve-in the tied of the gully. To Mr. Rowlatt: When witness took up the land nt present occupied by him there was a large stream of natural water flowing down the gully, which drained n very bitf watershed.—Mr. Rowlatt said that he had another witness, but as his evidence would be similar to that already given, he would not take up the time of the court by examining him. He would very much like, however, if his Worship would adjourn the application until next court-day and in the meantime visit the ground.—His Worship said he had no objection to do so if Mr. Rowlatt thought It would strengthen the case of his clients, lie might say that, from tho evidence adduced so far, he was not inclined to grant the application. It was In the interests of the whole community that every drop of water should, if possible, bo utilised, but the Trust had expended a considerable amount of moncv and they must not he rendered liable for damages. He thought the Trust would probably be willing to sanction tho taking; of a small quantity of water at certain tlmn If tb«y were consulted. He would ad

Journ the application, and take the earliest opportunity of visiting the ground. jft-IV. J. Plnmmer applied for an occupation license of is acres in Home Gully, about five acres consisting of old workings and three acres of the claim granted to Sung Shun Tong and others.—He was granted seven aeres, at Is. per acze.