(Before H. A, Stratford, Esq., Warden.) Theodor Meinert and Frederick King v. John Hardacre. —-Encroachment- at Duncan s Gully, Kyeburn Diggings, on an ordinary claim. Mr. Eowlatt for com plainants, Mr. Bailey for defendants. All witnesses being ordered to leave the Court, at Mr. Bailey's request, who also ob jected to both complainants remaining in Court if both were to be witnessess, °MV Kowlatt quoted from lioscoe, in support of both being allowed to remain, and the Warden supported his views, quoting from Judge Johnstone, page 116 clause 367. Frederick King was the principal witness for the complaint, and, as soon as he had been cross-examined, Mr. Bailey moved the Court to adjourn to the ground. On the ground at 3 pan., the Court was oponi-d, and Frederick"King examined as to marks, pegs, &e. Theodor Meinert was then examined, also William and Jame3 Smith, and Johu Stewart. After the examination of. .James Smith, Mr. Bailey remarked, " We admit that com- Slainants marked off the claim, it is not ispufced by us, but we call it jumping." In opening his defence, he added that, his client, Hardacre, had been a friend to complainants when they were in a state of poverty, and they had proved their gratitude by jumping his ground." John Hardacre, George Howe, Arthur Shar py, aud Terence Sharkey were ex amined as - to- Hardacre's original pegs, and to the ground he was supposed "to have possessed before complainants came to the district. The case was then ad journed to the Court House, Naseby. On the 26th John Hardacre, Terence Shar- <*» key, George Howe, Arthur Sharkey, and V James Meikle were heard for the de fence, and the Warden summed us as fol lows : The facts are, Hardacre took Meinert and King into his confidence, and provided them with work in March last, and had been working with them from then until sometime in August. He maraed off four claims with two miners* rights, and did not mark properly—all the evidence tending to this direction. 