When?—When I first began to drive the What is it }—It is a plan of the land in piles. question, adjoining the creek.
Mr. Wainewright—Just state shortly There are various lines of low water what happened. Have you heard the mark shown }—Yes. evidence which has been given in this suit State what they are.—The first is the about an attack by the police! low water line of 1864, from the Municipal Mr. Robinson—That was not in 1883, Council's plan. The next is the low water Witness—It was before that that the line from a plan of the same year by Whit-Council objected. It must have been in field and Kingsmill.
December, 1880, I think.
Mr. Wainewright—That is the line Mr.
Mr. Wainewright—You remember the Kingsmill told us was correctly copied from atigeby the police and the subsequent auitt Witness—Yes. his plan.
His Lordship—How does this affect the His Lordship—You were present question? It is admitted that the line has Witness—Yes. varied during these years, What is this That was in January, 1881?—Yes, to prove?
Mr. Wainewright—Are you aware that Mr. Wainewright—It is to show how that was ended by the Council submitting exceedingly vague the term beach-ground to a decree in 1881? or foreshore is, as applied to this ro party.
Witness—Yes.
His Lordship—Is not that admitted After the defendants had submitted to a Mr. Wainewright—I do not know what decree in August, 1881, was any further is admitted. remonstrance made on behalf of the Council His Lordship—It is admitted that the against the bunding?—No. line has varied. You go, to my mind, into Have you any opinion as to the meaning detail which is trivial. It seems to mo, if of the word "beach-ground"? Do you you will permit me to tell you so, that know what it means }—I thought I did When you are examining a witness-in-chief before this suit began; but I am afraid I—your own witness—you should examine don't now. I should understand by beach him generally in the statements. you want ground that land which has accreted beyond from him. he is cross-examined as to his statements, then go into what detail is accreted land, the land granted by the title deed—newly requisite in re-examination; but it is con-His Lordship—That would be over the rary, to my mind, to all principles of other side of the creek, according to Mr. examination-in-chief that you should go Giles's interpretation of the title deed, But into detail which is unnecessary. That is Mr. Giles and Mr. Parker give to my mind the reason why we waste such an enormous wholly different interprotationsof the mean-amount of time, because then the opposing Counsel also goes into all these details, anc ing of the title deed.
Mr. Wainewright—Yes, they do. we are an hour taking evidence which Mr. Robinson—Besides, such a definition might be taken in five minutes. That is would not even apply to Mr. Ince's land, my view.
Decauso they have gone into the river to Mr. Wainewright—(to witnoss)—That make up their area, plan shows the various lines of low water Witness—No, it does not apply to Mr. mark that it purports to show?
Inco's land, I consider.
Witness—I cannot vouch for them all.
Mr. Wainewright—The land you have They are from various plans. My obj t bunded in—was that beach-ground within in making this plan originally was to the meaning of the Regulation that the land did not silt up.
Witness—No, certainly not.
His Lordship—It shows lines of low _His Lordship—1 do not see the value of water mark from when to when? his opinion on that.
Witness—From 1864 to 1883, Witness—Becauso it was previously junk-Mr. Wainewright—It shows foreshore docks; and whatever beach-ground may be, outside the present line of bunding it is not junk-docks, Witness—Yes.
His Lordship—I do not see why junk:
Mr. Wainewright—Was the bunding docks should not be beach-ground. carried out under your superintendence Mr. Robinson—And you do not know Witness (Mr. Cory)—Yes. that they were junk-docks, You have only His Lordship—I want to have it down heard it. in my notes somewhere what bunding is.
His Lordship repeated that he did not What is bunding, Mr. Cory 7 ry see wu junk-docks should not be beach-
Witness—Shall I describe this bunding grot in particular His Lordship—You see I live out here, and I have a general idea of what bunding is; but supposing this goes before the Privy Council they will be puzzled tu know what, bunding is, Witness—Building to prevent the earth from falling away.
His Lordship—Would it be correctly Aescribed as embanking Witness—I think fairly, yes.
Mr. Robinson—When you say ' build-don't you mean driving in piles "itness—Yes, or by stones His Lordship—Embanking by piles or stones Witness—Yes, or it might be anything—it might be iron, Mr. Wainewright—I think ''embanking" is about correct. Perhaps the witness will state how this embankment was made. -Witness—Piles wore driven along it at a distance of about 2ft. 6, and at the bank of the piles were planks of wood. It was filled in with mud in the first place, and then faced with stone.
Mr. Wainewright—When was that bund-commenced itness—On the dth March, 1883.
_Witness—Because they must be above high water mark; otherwise the junks could not be repaired, Cross-examine Mr. Robinson—What did you let the property to Messrs. Wheelock & Ca. for in May 1870?
Witness—To put their cargo-boats on to repair them. tael a year, They nade an agreement that What rent did they pay 1—They paid one they wore to turn out at a moment's notice, iis Lordship—One tael per annum! That is very cheap.
Mr. Robinson—You then let it to Ching Chang. What rent did he pay Witness—First five dollars a month, then ten dollars a month. I raised his rent.
Five dollars a month for how long?
His Lordship—Can it matter, Mr. Robinson, whether it was for one month or for ten months Mr. Robinson—Except that he was clearly exempted from taxation on the ground that it was unproductive to him, His Lordship—On the other hand, the Council's case is because it was beach-land.
Mr. Robinson—It explains the letter of the Municipal Council which says that if
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.