SOUTHLAND'S LAND LAWS.

Evening Star, Issue 3239, 8 July 1873, Page 3

SOUTHLAND'S LAND LAWS.

Many of our readers who may not have the time or the patience to follow the legal arguments in the appeal of Webster and Gibbs against a recent decision of the Southland Land Board, may nevertheless be glad to see a short and plain account of the circumstances which led to the appeal, and to be put in possession of the facts necessary to enable them to form a fair idea of the effect of Mr Justice Chapman’s judgment in that case, on the administration of the waste _ lands of the district. Several months ago his Honor the Superintendent communicated to the Land Board his desire to have the land for two miles on each side of the proposed Winton-Kingston line withdrawn from sale, until the Assembly should have had time to consider the propriety of modifying the existing Southland land law. The wisdom and prudence of such a step are obvious, and the earnestness with which it was urged upon the Board indicated a sincere desire on° the part of his Honor and his advisers, the Tolmie Executive, to conserve the public estate of the district for settlement. 'I he Reid party, unable to deny this, and yet determined to attribute designs of a directly opposite kind to the Superintendent and Executive, have been driven to the desperate and malignant expedient of stigmatising this proposal as “ a mere electioneering dodge.” Mr James Wilson, in his recent speech at Waikiwi, was not ashamed to do so, forgetful that the disingenuous character of his criticism must necessarily be exposed by a reference to the date of his Honor’s proposalmonths before there was any probability of an election. But this we merely note in passing. The Board highly approved of his Honor’s suggestion, but replied that under the present law they did not possess the power to withdraw the land from sale in the maimer proposed. They further suggested that his Honor should proclaim the land a reserve, under certain powers possessed by him under the Act. The Superintendent, having obtained a legal opinion, replied that ho could not do so, as his power of making reserves was limited to the setting apart of land for specific public purposes, to which purposes the lauds set apart must be devoted, and from which they could not be alienated except by subsequent legislation. The general considerations of public policy on which it was desired to set apart this laud did not fall within this limitation ; therefore such a reserve, even should his Honor make it, would be illegal, and might be broken through by any determined land-buyer who should appeal to law. It appeared, on a* close examination of the Land Acts, that neither the Superintendent nor the Board had any power to withdraw the land from sale. But the 2 ( .)th section of the Amending Act of 1807 contained a provision, aimed evidently at the practice of “ spotting,” or the “gridiron system,” so-called, by which speculators have at times attempted to obtain command of a considerable area of land by comparatively small purchases. This provision empowered the Board to withdraw from sale any land the sale of which might injure the value of adjoining unsold land. Under this power, the Superintendent said, the Board might withdraw the land in question, and he urged them to do so. The Board, though inclined to withdraw the land, hesitated, supposing, and as it now proves, rightly supposing, that the power conferred by this section of the Act did not apply to the case in question. In the meantime Messrs Webster and Gibbs applied for 2,000 acres of the land in question, on the Bth of April last. This application the Board, after discussion, and against the opinion of two of tiie members, Messrs Baker and Macarthur, granted, on the ground that they had no power to refuse it. At their next meeting the Board decided to refuse all applications within the strip of land extending two miles on each side of the line, until the opinion of a Judge of the Supreme Court should be obtained as to the Board’s power to withdraw the laud under the 29th section of the Amending Act, framed as above described, to prevent “spotting.” In the meantime Messrs Webster and Gibbs applied for 720 acres more of the land in question. The Board refused the Application. Messrs Webster and Gibbs appealed to the Supreme Court. While the appeal was pending, the Superintendent, alarmed at the unprecedented rush for laud in Southland, urged the Board to withdraw not only the two miles on each side of the railway, but all the agricultural land in the district, from sale, under this 29th section of the Amending Act, framed, as wo have said, to prevent “spotting.” The Board, doubting their power to do so under this clause, and there being no other under which they could withdraw land from sale, resolved, as a matter of prudence, not to grant any applications until the Judge’s decision was obtained. Applications, however, were received, opened, and filed, at the meetings of the Board. The appeal of Messrs Webster and Gibbs was heard by his Honor Mr Justice Chapman on Saturday. 21st inst., and judgment was delivered on Tuesday. Th e appeal was allowed, and in the course of his judgment, his Honor expressed his opinion that under the existing law the Superintendent had no power to make such a reserve as that proposed, of two miles on each side of the WintonKingston railway; and further that the power to withdraw land or refuse applications conferred on the Board by the 29th scci ion of the Amending Act (a section framed to prevent “ spotting”) did not apply to the present case. This being the law, it follows of course that the Board has no power to withdraw from sale all the agricultural land in the Province, as the •Superintendent wished them to do. No change apparently can he made in the present state of matters, by which the public estate of Southland is open to all buyers, in blocks of any size that may bo desired, at one pound per acre, until the Assembly meet. That some change is urgently required may be judged from the fact, that when the applications presented to the Board up to Tuesday last shall have been granted, upwards of 79,000 acres of the public estate of the district will have passed into priv.atc hands since Ist April last. —FuiUldaud Times.