Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

The Lyttelton Times.

Saturday, Jure 4. Mr. FitzGerald's letter*has "laid before us very lucidly the history of waste lands legislation in New Zealand since the passing' of the Constitution Act; and his advice to the provinces appears to us the safest under the circumstances. But we cannot rejoice in the disallowance of the Waste Lands Act of 1858—a disallowance which again throws the colony into confusion, and re-opens questions the very discussion of which is mis-. chievous and dangerous. ~ .

Thq great difficulty with respect to waste lands legislation ' lies in the fact that the Constitution Act restrains the power of dealing with the subject to the General Legislature j-whilst an evident necessity exists for the transfer of this power to the several provinces. The whole course of legislation in the colony under the present Constitution Act, as traced by Mr. FitzGerald, shows the prevailing" and. almost unanimous opinion on this subject. No party has ever attempted seriously to wrest the real power of management of the waste lands from the provinces, though differences of opinion have arisen as to the manner in which this power should be exercised, without taking from the central authorities that ultimate control which the constitution requires should vest in them. The Waste Lands Act of 1854 met the difficulties of the case to a great extent, and no complication would have arisen but for the blunder made in England in the allowance of the second, that is, the Provincial Waste Lands Act of 1854; the legitimate consequences of which, when exemplified by the Waste Lands of 1856, the Crown lawyers found to be contrary to the Constitution Act. After the allowance, however, of the. Provincial Waste Lands Act of 1854, it is no wonder that some of the provinces began to legislate confidently under the act of 1856, which was framed strictly according to the powers given in the former law. On the disallowance of the act of 1856, all was again "in confusion, and the act of 1858 was passed to quiet all doubts, and to set matters at rest forever. This. act appeared to us, and still appears to us, so far as it confirmed existing regulations, to have met the difficulties of the case. The real management of the waste lands was still left in the hands of- provincial authorities; while only the ultimate control was reserved as before for the General Government. One great advantage was secured to us by the legislation of last year ; the revenue which was only guaranteed to us by resolution of the House of Representatives was confirmed to us by act. This last provision was no small security; and even the possible re-opening of a question like this must tend to shake the credit of the whole colony. ■.■■-■

Fortunately, the existence of the; Waste Lands Act of 1854 may save the colony from much confusion. We sincerely hope >ith Mr. FitzGerald that the provinces which have legislated under the act of 1856 will at once avail themselves of the former act. The General Government cannot hesitate to confirm existing- regulations by proclamation under the provisions of that act, if applied to by the provinces which are affactcd by the acts'.of 1856 and 1858. The position of our land laws is. far too serious to make it a party question. The titles of a large portion of the real property in New Zealand are involved, and it is to be hoped that the next session, of the General .Assembly will1 quiet doubts once for all. This may'easily be done as Mr. FitzGerald sug-g-estsj", and during the

next session the titles hitherto given should be confirmed by ex post facto legislation The Imperial Government can scarcely refuse assent to an act for this purpose, considering the serious doubts as to the validity of p ro . vincial legislation under the act of 1856* especially as it was the error of the Home Government that led the colony to pass that act.

Mr. FiteGerald has traced the history of waste lands legislation in the colony af ■large. It will be well for us to examine the position m which we stand ourselves with respect to, provincial legislation. It is on the whole a very satisfactory one. Our Land Regulations of 1856 were proclaimed by the Governor in February 1856 and a trifling amendment was proclaimed' in August of the same year. So far our Ree-ula tions are unimpeachable, as they owe their existence to the Waste Lands Act of-1854 In November of the same year, under the authority of the Waste Lands Act of 1856 a provincial Waste Lands Regulations Amendment Ordinance was passed, embodying a further slight amendment. This [ordinance was assented to by His Excellency and came into operation^ at once. It is doubtful, however whether this ordinance is valid now, and it will be advisable to get the provisions contained in it proclaimed under the act of 1854 A clause to validate any title that may he affected by this ordinance should be comprised in the act which must be passed in the next session of the General Assembly to quiet doubts as to title which may have arisen in any part of the colony owing to the uncertainty of the law. A second provincial Waste Lands Regulations Amendment Ordinance was passed in February, 1858 ; but was not assented to by the Governor, owing to the disallowance of the act of 1855 j so that the ordinance has remained a dead letter. It was included in the schedule to the Waste Lands Act of 1856, and would have become law had that been allowed. The provisions of this ordinance might also be bought into force by His Excellency's proclamation under the Act of 1354.

We may congratulate ourselves on the safety of our position under existing circumstances. At the same time, with the act of 1854 to fall back upon, we conceive that no lasting* inconvenience is' to be apprehended in other settlements whose whole waste land legislation is based on the act of 1856. An act to quiet titles will be all that is required next session.

There are one or two points in Mr. Fitzgerald's letter besides the waste lands question, the consideration of which we must postpone.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/LT18590604.2.14

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Lyttelton Times, Volume XI, Issue 686, 4 June 1859, Page 4

Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,043

The Lyttelton Times. Lyttelton Times, Volume XI, Issue 686, 4 June 1859, Page 4

The Lyttelton Times. Lyttelton Times, Volume XI, Issue 686, 4 June 1859, Page 4

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert