THE SUPREME COURT.

West Coast Times, Issue 276, 11 August 1866, Page 5

THE SUPREME COURT.

The second session of the Supreme Court for the Westlind district commenced in the Court House, Hokitika, on the morning on which our last summary was published, viz., the 16th July. As on the former occasion, his Honor Mr Justice! Gresson presided. His Honor delivered] the customary charge to the Grand Jury, ■ who, on the conclusion of their labors, \ made a presentment of unusual length and gravity. It dwelt upon the insufficiency of the existing arrangements for the administration of justice on the West Coast ; the necessity of a more frequent gaol delivery, a nd of the' appointment of either a resident or a district judge ; upon the in convenience resulting from the absence of | a local machinery for administration in in- ! solvency ; upon the insufficiency ' of the gaol accommodation, and other matters of pressing importance. His Honor, in his reply, promised to recommend the various j matters referred to to the consideration of | both the General and Provincial Governments. The criminal calendar was a heavy one, not including, however, any case of a capital character. The Grand Jury found true bills in the majority of cases sent before them, and they were severally disposed of in due course. None of the trials were marked by features of a special character that call for particular notice. In the civil sittings of the Court, which followed, some important causes engaged the attentionof the judge andjury. We may specify two, which have excited a large amount of interest. In one, Messrs Alcorn and others brought an action for damages — kid at Llooo— against Messrs Lange and Thoneman, merchants, of Dunedin and Melbourne, for non-performance of contract for the delivery of certain goods to order. The order, to the amount of some LISOO, was taken by the agent of the defendants, who afterwards declined to execute it, for reasons set .forth on the trial. The plaintiffs pleaded loss in consequence, as they had declined ordering from other houses, on the faith that the goods would be duly supplied them, according to agreement, and through the default of defendants their business had been materially interfered with. After a very lengthened hearing the jury gave a verdict for plaintiffs, with LSOO damage?. A rule nisi has since been obtained by the defendants for a new trial, but it is doubtful whether proceedings will be carried further. The other case we particularise is marked by features of a more singular character." " Greenstone," which is said to be of the 1 nature of pure jasper, is nn article which has long been held in high estimation by the New Zealanders, and as an article of commerce amongst them fetches an almost fabulous price. An unusually largo block or slab of this material, was found at a date prior to the discovery of the gold fields on the West Coast, by a Maori named Simon Tuangau, who appears to have taken possession of it, and to have exercised in some fashion, and irregularly and at intervals, the right of ownership over it. It was subsequently found by a Mr Reynolds, who was on a look out for this material, and who, believing the slab to be abandoned by the original | discoverer, asserted a right of property in it, and proceeded forthwith to break it up by blasting and to carry away its fragments. These were, however, seized in transhtt by the police on the authority of a warrant issued by the Resident Magistrate ut Greymouth, who it was alleged, acted at the instigation of the Mnori Simon. Reynolds brought his action against Simon for unlawful detention of the green - stone. But the real issue for trial was the question — in which of the two the propertyright lay ? It* was ruled by the learned Judge that the Maori had undoubtedly created a right of property in the stone by his original appropriation of it, but it was for the jury to determine whether he had forfeited that right by abandonment, so as to entitle a second finder to take possession of it as his own. This issue has now been tried by two juries. The first trial lasted for three days, and the jury were discharged for non-agreement. On the second trial it was agreed between counsel for the parties, that the evideuce given on the first should be taken as it appeared on the Judge's notes. This arrangement greatly shortened the proceedings, but it had not the effect of helping the jury to a prompt decision. The summing up of the Judge closed last evening, at eight o'clock, and at midnight, not being able, anymore than their predecessors, to come to au agreement, they also were locked up for the night ; and, we understand, there is very little probability of their arriving at onene.ss of mind. This greenstone case promises to hold a foremost place amongst the celebrated judicial causes of New Zealand.