AN INTERESTING CASE.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 923, 16 September 1910, Page 3

AN INTERESTING CASE.

•APPLICATIONS FOR SAWMILLING - LICENSES. ."■■■' /"" (By Telegraph—Press'Association.).'j ■.-.'./: , .. Dunedin, September 14. } Mr. Justice Williams was engaged in' the Supreme- Court to-day. 'in hearing, a motion .for- a/mandamus directed to the Commissioner of State. Forests compelling him to hear and determine applications for sawmilling licenses.. in respect to lands held by Horatio A. Massey.\ The plaintiff is Alexander '/Robert. Wallis, of Dunedin, sawmiller., Defendant, by filed statements, sari-he had duly heard. and determined, applications made, by plaintiff /and had refused-to. grant rtliem, the expressed reason of : refusal being., that, the areas, - were : already, held' by" Massey under good titles.' ■'""/.. ;.; .. '.-Mr.' Solomon, who appeared for plaintiff, said a .great many, years, ago Massey obtained certain titles !to pertain sawmill licensed' areas in Southland. '" They .contended that these ■ licenses, by, operation of,law, had ceased to exist. Then,;.after the licenses had ceased to exist, plaintiff .made 'application ;for them.,' ljij" Commissioner, of State Forests,', holding, that -titles had not. . come, toi end,' told- plaintiff •: that as these proper-. : ties-were held by Massey, and not open for selection, . his application could , not be considered. They, contended /that .' although the . Minister had. absolute discretion to say,- after; consideration, of applications, hhat. ho would ,or would not grant" such applications, .he had. ho /right to say. that no would, not. consider any, applications.That attitude,' counsel understood, was how taken up by.the Ci;own/ ; Mr. Eraser, who. appeared-for'/-the Commissioner, ••.■'submitted that the: -Gommis-. sioner. was a Minister: of, the: Crown, and ' maridamus/would/nbt go, to a ■ servant, of the Crown to ; compel him to discharge ■his 'administrative/functions. :The/ Minister had" absolute and -'-uncontrolled'dis- • cretion;' for which he was responsible to, Parliament, -and, not to ! the : Judiciary. Tlie .second,' point was that plaintiff, had no specific "legal right to , that which; Me prayed/, for.;, ~-The' third ; point. l ;was - that -the Commissioner had already' l fiilly"exer.cised his discretion on the .. application made by, Wallis/ awl : if the court-has ■jurisdiction it,(should .not-.exercise.;it as 'plaintiff /woiild' admittedly "derive," no. benefit from- the . writ. 1 His Honour .said , he was satisfied, the application must fail.' Tho .Minister has already -: exercised • his discretion. Judgi ment was given for defendant ;.with costs, on the middle scale. ■;