ORIGINAL CORRESPONDENCE.

New Zealand Spectator and Cook's Strait Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 626, 2 August 1851, Page 3

ORIGINAL CORRESPONDENCE.

To the Editor of the ‘‘ New Zealand Spectator.” „ tt Wellington, 31st. July, 1851. K ‘T Upon the dlvision of the General Council on the proposal to introduce into the Land Claims Bill a clause barring dower, three members of the Council including the two Attorneys Creneral voted for it, the majority voting against it. It may be inferred that the members who understood the clause voted for it. The majority do not seem to be aware that all transactions relating to land in the New Zealand Company’s Settlements, with very few exceptions (possibly one in a.thousand cases) haveproceeded on the assumption that no right to dower accrued under the Company’s Land order. .■ In very few conveyances of land in England is a proviso to bar dower omitted; the object of its insertion being to avoid increased expenses on the subsequent transfer of the property. If this precaution is taken where all parties who would otherwise become interested are readily accessible, how much more desirable is it in those cases where the interested parties are resident at a distance of sixteen thousand miles. Why oughtthe purchasers of land to be compelled to accept an estate differing in its qualities from that which they were led to expect when they acquired a right to it? Why are titles which have been passed upon the faith tl'at n° dower would attach to be disturbed. Those who may feel inclined to give less weight to the evil proposed, to be remedied because it will most injuriously affect the interests of absentees, should recollect that whatever impediments are thrown in the way of safe and easy transfers of land in these Settlements are direct injuries to the Settlements themselves. Believing: that the motion wn D j ignorance of its actual operation, I should strongly urge the reconsideration of it. I am. Sir, Your obedient Servant An Interested Observer.