IMPORTANT TO DEFERRED PAYMENT LAND-HOLDERS.

Dunstan Times, Issue 831, 22 March 1878, Page 3

IMPORTANT TO DEFERRED PAYMENT LAND-HOLDERS.

On the recommendation of the House of Representatives, the Government recently appointed Judge Ward and Mr Slianks aa commissioners to inquire into the circumstances detailed in the petition of James Mackintosh and son, complaining of the action of the Southland Waste Land Hoard in reference to their deferred payment holdings. The facts of the case, and tho finding of the commissioners, are thus set out in their report to tho Governor : On the 31st August, 1874, James' Macintosh, senior, and. James Mackintosh, junior, applied for sections SO and 81, Oreti, respectively, such lands being then open to application for purchase on deferred payments, but unsurveyed. On 21st March 1870, a “ license to occupy” was granted to each, and fees in respect of issue of licenses paid, together with rent. These licenses contained in clause 4 provisions that related back to, 31st August, 1874, referring inter alia to forfeiture of the laud in case of tho non-compliance thereof within six months | from that date (vide licensoiiereto annexed), j Those provisions were simply absurd, inas- I mucb as the date from which tho time re- j quired by the Otago Waste Lands Act, . 1872. for residence and improvements has to be computed is that of tho issue of the license. But the Board was placed in au awkward position by the proclamation of unsurvdyed land as land to be selected on deferred payments; the applicant tendering his payments in respect thereof as accruing from the date of his application, and the Board finding it impossible with all the adjoining land applied for, to issue licenses to occupy without survey. It was, however, contented on tho part of the Board that under sub-section 4 of clause 54 of the Otago Waste Lands Act, 1872, the licensee was bound to occupy the allotment applied for, personally, within six months of the issue of the license, and it seems clear that this contention is correct. The two licenses were issued on 26ih March, 1876. James Mackintosh, senior, slept on his land only twice—viz., on 4th and 10th April, 1877 and James Mackintosh, junior, only once, viz., in December, 1877. There can be no question, therefore, that the condition of personal occupation was not fulfilled, and that a forfeiture was thereby incurred. Certain improvements, valued at L 67, were made on tbo land of each petitioner, and, in addition, a house valued at L 25 was erected on each section. James Mackintosh, senior, gave no excuse for bis non-residence. James Mackintosh, junior, stated that under medical advice he left Southland for Melbourne in June, 1876, an! returned at the end of the ensiling Novombei, as soon as his health was restored ; and that ho had intended to reside on the land as soon as he had drained it, it being very wet. This statement was not made by him to the to the I!sard at tho time the forfeiture was decreed. Wo have to report that a forfeiture was incurred in the case of each petitioner ; and that, in enforcing such forfeiture, tho Waste Laud Board simply acted in accordance with their duty, and without cither harshness or partiality. But we are of opinion that in the esse of the younger petitioner there, existed a valid excuse for non-residence, unknown to the Board. Both petitioners appear to ha genuine settlors ; noth have made considerable improvements on their land, and both appear to have been misled as to the meaning of thn Words *• personal occupation” in sub-section 4, of clause 54, of the Otago Waste Lands Act, 1872, inasmuch aa they believed that they had fully complied with that condition. Tho Minister of Lands, in forwarding the report to the Board, wrote as follows : 11 The Government fully recognise the necessity of a strict enforcement of the letter as well as the spirit of the law in respect of the duo fullilment of the conditions under which land on deferred payment can be acquired. At the same time as the 'case in question appears to be the first that has been dealt with so strictly, it is submitted that the Board might well reconsider its decision and deal with the matter under the powers conferred by the j 63rd section of tbo Lands Act, 1877.” The I Minister adds, that as it appears the ranger ] .(on whoso report the applications in ques- ! tidn have been dealt with) lias not been I acting altogether impartially, his removal ' to another district is suggested.