Parliamentary Notes.

Thames Star, Volume XIII, Issue 4264, 31 August 1882, Page 2

Parliamentary Notes.

[By Telegbaph.] (fbom oub own cobbespondknt.)

Wellington, Last night. The Colonial Treasurer informed the House this afternoon that it had been arranged to bring on Supply at 7.30 p m. to»morrow. tie gave his notice that Green's amendment relative to the proposed Waihemo County might be disposed of at to-day's sitting. Holmes gave notice to move as follows on Thursday, 7th September :— :< That in the opinion of this House, it is advisable to establish insular self government and insular financial separation, and that the Government should bring down, as soon as possible, a bill to give effect to the objects referred to in this resolution."

The following is the report of the Goldfields Committee on the petition of George Harcourt: — " Your Committee have the honor to report that, in the opinion of the Committee, the Native Minister, when in the North, after inquiries as to whether the petitioner was complying with regulations other than the condition, if any, that the consent of the Government should be first obtained, satisfied himself that he was so complying, and assured the petitioner that the claim made for assistance should be met. The assurance of a Minister visiting an outlying district, although not strictly responsible for the Mines Department in the matter of administrative detail, ought, in the opinion of the Committee, to have been reapected, and accident or change of Ministry should notaffectsuch assurance. The statement by Mr Oliver in the House in August, 1880, confirms (he Committee's view that, if the regulations were complied with, the claim should be met. The Committee, therefore, recommend the payment of such sum as the petitioner would have been entitled to receive under the regulations, provided the Government is satisfied, on enquiry, that the work was carried on outside the distance prescribed.—C. De Lmttoub, Chairman."

WARDEN'S COURT.—This Day,

(Before H. Kenrick, Esq, Warden.) TRHEEL OF EOBTUNE G.M.CO. V. TAIEUA

GEM G.31.C0

This was au action for trespass and encroachment on the plaintiff's ground and machine site.

Mr Miller for plaintiff, and Mr J. B, Kussell, of Auckland, for defendant. Mr Miller said the plaintiffs based their

title on a license from the Warden, and since that the Gem Co. had been working on the ground. It would be for them to show why they had done So.

F. J. Burgess, Mining Registrar, deposed—The license of the Wheel of Fortune is still in force; it was granted under Class 2. The certificate of the machine site No. 13 is uodir the hand of the Warden and the Wheel of Fortune registered owners. Thomas Kneeboce, mine manager for the Wheel Fortune Company, deposed thai from the time the licenses was granted on July 14, he and other em ployee3 of the Company had been in possession of the ground and working it for the Company. Four other men had also been working there, supposed to be for the Gem Company. Mr John Lapham was one of them, and acting as mine manager for the Gem. The Gem had taken out from 30 to 40 tons of quartz from the time they began in July to the present. Told Lapham they were working in his ground, and if they continued to work it would be at their own risk. Lapham replied that would hare to be proved. They continued to work after that warning. The machine site is 39 chains away from the claim; it was purchased from Mrs Day kin. There are two cottages irrespective of the blacksmith's shop, which were likewise bought from her. Laphpamand his men took up the whole flooring and the saddle boards of the cottages to build a cottage for themselves on the ground, which one of the men has been occupying since. He would not like to repur the damage for less than £10. His company would eventually have used the cottages for themselves. Mr Kanderson is known as the legal manager of the Gem Compaay. Lapham showed witness a telegram from Mr Eanderson to go on at all risks with regard to the ground, but it did not refer to the machine site.

Cross-examined—Had been manager since May Ist, and the other men had always been working on. behalf of the Gem.

Mr Miller argued that the license was indefeasable, and that the Court had no right to inquire into the preliminaries relative to granting it. It was designed to give absolute security. Claims were not indefeasable.

Mr Russell argued contra. This, he understood, was a Court of rough and ready justice rather of technicalities. He never knew of any title that could not be upset for fraud. Mr Miller's contention shocked him.

His Worship would not give a decision on the point at present. He had always held that a license was indefeasable except on the ground of fraud. A claim, he held, was that for which a license was granted. Witness was under the impression that they were on their own ground, but subsequently found not. As far as building a bouse on other people's property, people do not stick at a trifle in the goldfields. The men usually built the cottages in the company's time. The cottage occupied four or five weeks in building. Mr Burgess, re called, produced an objection to the right to a tramway, put in on June 23rd by Mr Lapham on behalf of the Gem Company. Mr Randerson had communicated to the Warden as legal manager of the Gem Company. Application for Gem No. 1 Claim, applied for by John Featon in March, 1882, put in, Mrs I'aykin abandoned that portion of the Reward Claim not included in the Wheel of Fortune in January, 3882, and she took up the balance as the Golden Mint.

Mr Russell stated defendants contend that Mr Featon was the owner of the ground, and they were working through arrangement with him.

John Featon, deposed—He knows Mr Lapham, who has been in the employ of the Gem Company for five or six weeks, and was supposed to be breaking out quartz on the disputed ground. The Tairua Gem Company has had about six men working. Mr Lapham was authorised to build a hut of slabs at his own suggestion, and the Company would pay for it.

Cross-examined by Mr Russell—He was not authorised to take other people's property for it. It waa distinctly understood he was to cut down trees to procure slabs.

H. T. Rowe surreyar, deposed to the accuracy of the plan of the Wheel of Fortune mine, and the workings thereon. The plan was lodged in November, but the connections required by the Mining Inspector were not made until July 13fch when it was accepted. A portion of the Reward claim was in the Wheel of Fortune claim, but they expected te arrange for it. Mr Lockwood employed him to survey the Wheel of Fortune and Mr Featon for the Gem; there was no company then.

D. B. McDonald, manager of the Wheel of Fortune Company, deposed he remembered Mrs Day kin objecting t« the granting of the Wheel of Fortune license. Two or three shares were given her as a consideration for withdrawing. Featon and Lockwood sold out their interests to the company in May, and he heard of no further objections till June. Mr Lockwood supplied a copy of the Wheel of Fortune plan; he reported he had taken up fifteen men's ground.

Mr Russell continued his cross examination to show that the Warden had granted a license to a limited company not in existence.

The Warden pointed out that the application was made to grant the license to the company, certain persons to be afterwards disclosed, and if he had done wrong the course would lie with Mr Lockwood to bring action for the Warden having granted the license to other parties than he intended, which was not alleged.

(Left sitting.)