PRE-EMPTIVE RIGHTS: IMPORTANT POINT.

Evening Star, Issue 3343, 6 November 1873, Page 2

PRE-EMPTIVE RIGHTS: IMPORTANT POINT.

At the Waste Laud Board meeting to-day Mr Hagiritt, for Mr W. A. Tolmie, applied to bo allowed to select his pre-emptive right of 640 acres over run 78 A. The contention was that 78 A and 788 were separate runs, and appeared as such on the survey maps of the Province ; while the lease of the former was separate and distinct from the other, it having been granted under the Act of 1872, while that of the latter was under the JS66 Act. The Act of 1872 allowed a run to be subdivided, and the nmho'ider to obtain two pre-emptive rights instead of one. In this way Mr Tolmie, to use a common expression, was enabled to get on the windward side of the Board ; and the Legislature was to blame for giving such a loophole. But while it afforded the ruubolder such an advantage, it afforded disadvantages, as it allowed of two reserves of 1,000 acres each, being made under section 150, and of two reserves for letting on deferred payments. The lease of run 78A. having been granted under the 1872 Act, and no pre-emptive rLht having been exercised in respect of it, Mr Tolmie was now entitled to have his pre-emptive right. Mr Bastings ; I may say, on behalf of the Government, that this matter has occupied the attention of the Executive since it was brought up last week, and they are decidedly of opiniop that to grant tl}e application would be a violation of the spirit qf the Act, and r.hey are disposed to resist it by all means in their power, if they pan possibly do so. There was a provision in the 1866 Act that tpe preemptive right must be exercised before the run was subdivided. Was it not so, Mr Thomson ? The Chief Commissioner was understood to say that sub-divisions had gone on always as matters of course, and pre-emptive rights obtajned for them. Mr Bastings i I may further say that the Government think it is to bo regretted that this course had not been adopted ; that the pre-emptive right should be exercised before the runs were cut up, and the Government intend in future leases to make provision that no person having taken advantage of this part of the Act shall be allowed it over any fresh lease issued. Mr Strode : That is the only remedy, and was suggested by Mr Haggitt. Mr Bastings : It is quite easy to see that a rim-folder mightjget dnmipies, make three ©r four sqb-dfvisibns of hje run, affd by that means might obtain the whole fee-simple of the run, The Chief Commissioner ; The fact of the matcer is it clearly a law point. Mr Tolmie is the original lessee, and he retains this part of the run. He has already exercised his right over the other part. Mr Haggitt : Not under this Act, and the right was exercised under a different title altogether. The old license was under the 1866 Act; this is under that of 1872. Mr Bastings said a transferee might have applied to exercise the right of pre-emption over 78 \, but Mr Tolmie being the original lessee, could not. That was as clear as possible. The Chief Commissioner contended that the pre-emptive right had already been exercised. Mr Haggitt: Not unless you q.re prepared to hold that Mr Tolmie is not the holder of a pastoral lease under section 103 a. The Chief Commissioner :Of course, lam not here to clear up the defects of this Act ; at the same time, 1 am bound to act in the spirit and intention of the Act. On the matter being put to the vote, Mr Clark expressed himself to be decidedly' opposed to the application; Mr Keid was of opinion that it was precisely similar to that of Mr Logan, which had been granted ;Mr Mr Butterworfch declined to grant it; Mr Strode thought it must he granted, there being no way out of it, as the law was plain; Mr Bastings and the Chief Commissioner also opposed the application, which was refused. Mr Haggitt applied to have a case stated

for the Supreme Court.