J. A. MILLER v. TAIRUA G.M. CO.

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2011, 15 June 1875, Page 2

J. A. MILLER v. TAIRUA G.M. CO.

The plaint was — James Armstrong Miller, Solicitor, • Parawai, against John Neayes, of ■ Tairua, miner; William Benjamin Jackson, of Tairua, storekeeper ; Nikorima Pautatara, of Parawai, farmer; Thomas Anderson, of Coromandel, miner; John Blennerhasset Beeche, of Grahamstown, miner; John Graham, of Auckland, gentleman; John Jamea Wilson, of Auckland, traveller; George Tupp, of Auckland ; George Samuel Graham, of Auckland, insurance agent; Frederick Henry Cripp ;n, of Thames, clerk, and the Tairua Goldmining Company, Limited—defendants. 1. That the defendants are in occupation for goldmining purposes of certain ground lituate at Tairua^ within the Hauraki Goldmining District, and are occupying the same as a claim within the meaning of the Goldmining Districts Act, 1873. 2. That the. defendants have no title or right to occupy the said ground for mining purposes, or as a claim, the said ground, not having been by or,for the defendants marked out as required by Uaw-Mo wit, by causing to be erected at every angle thereof a post not less than three inches square or three inches in diameter. 3. That the complainant is desirous of taking possession of and occupying the said ground for mining purposes. "Wherefore the complainant claims — That, by reason of the premises the defendants be adjudged to have no title to or right to occupy the ground as aforesaid, and that the complainant be granted an order of I the Warden authorizing him to tako pos- [ session of the said ground and that the complainant have such other relief in the premises. as the caso may require. On resuming:—■ ; Mr Macdonald opened the case for the objector, J. A. Miller, in a somewhat lengthy address, and called—-

James Armstrong Miller, who, having been sworn, deposed—l am a solicitor, carrying on practice iv Grahamstown. I hold a Miner's Eight. (Produced.) lam

the J. A. Miller, plaintiff against John Neeves and others. lam the objector in this case.

Mr Hesketh declined to cross-examine witness.

Frederick James Burgess deposed—l am Clerk in the office of the Mining Begistrar. I produce an application for register of a claim called the Tairua in the Tairua district; also produce registration had upon that application. In registering I was the Clerk who received the application which I produce in evidence. The application shows, the date when I removedit, the22iidof May, 1875. The parties who came in for the application were Mr Graham (a gentleman with spectacles), Mr John B. JLJeoche, and Mr Neeves. I wrote the document I hold in my hand at the dictation of three persons. Having filled it up I gave it them to sign, and it was signed and delivered back to me. They paid me for it. Mr Eeecho came back afterwards to «cc who signed it. He did not seem quite satisfied. He seemed to think Mr Graham's name ought to have been on.

Mr Macdonald: -How do you know that? Witness : From what he said.. Mr Macdonald : What did he say.'. Mr Hesketh objected. They had nothing to do with what Mr Becchc said afterwards. His Worship said this was not the claim before the Court, being pegged • out on the eighth, ; Mr Tyler: We-shall come to that ;often. ; Mr Macdonald said that was the only claim registered as the Tairua Claim. \ Mr Macdonald then proceeded to contend that he was justified in eliciting information as to what Mr Beeche said. The Court decided against him.

Examination continued : When Beeche came back I did not refer to the application because I had done so when thoy came in previously, and I was sure of it. In consequence of what Mr Beeche said I made to him a communication. When Messrs Ncevrs, Graham, and Beeche came first, they wanted to :know in whose name the license produced (marked A ) was applied for. I told them it was applied for to be granted Necvcs. Then thoy said they would register it in John Neeves.

John Neves, sworn, deposed—l spell my name " Neves." I am the applicant whose name is before the Court. lam applying for a claim which I marked out on the Bth April last. That the application is dated the 10th .is the fault of-the man who made the application out—that man was Wm. Graham. I believe I marked out on the Bth. It must have been about half-past four in the afternoon; I did not mark out at half-past five in the morning. I was at Tairua on the morning of the 10th. I came down on Friday the 9th, and returned the same afternoon, I came' down oh Saturday morning, leaving about half-past sev.en. Saw the brothers Beeche there on that morning. I swear I did not mark out the claim on Saturday morning of the 10th, and the Beeches did not"do so that I know of. I will swear that, the Beeches had no interest in the claim. I promised them one when the affair was settled. George Tupp was also there. He is a man who came up to help mo mark out' the 1 ground. He was there . helping oa the eighth, and was there on the morning of the lO'li." I was on the site of tJie claim that morning, went to the south-east and south-west pegs. Did not tcuch them. James Beeche went with me. The two "Beeches and I started to go to the north-east.and north-west peps. . Tupp went round the Tairua claim to show some other men the pegs. I don't know who the men were I did not go up again after coming down on Saturday before I made the application. The Beeches had no claim at Tairua at that time. John Beeche was at that time manager of the Crown Princess mine, in Albert street, Grahamstown. Beeche knew that we found gold on the site. He knew before he went up there. I . came^ down on the Sunday .to find out wliat . day the . proclamation would be out. I ascertained late in the evening from William Graham, between Graharastown and Shortland. All that Mr Graham . said 'to me was, i that" the proclamation wan out. He told me.it was out on the Thursday-evening, on the Bth. " -. _ - - By- the Court: I am sure he told me j the Bth.- ---" ' [Left sitting].