Untitled

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume IX, Issue 917, 12 February 1881, Page 3

It is a popular belief that the inquisitorial nature of the proceedings ot the Boards of Review under the Property Assessment Act, are its most objectionable feature ; and, so far it has been thought that although one’s most private affairs are subjected to a Governmental scrutiny, everything was being done that should be done, and in a correctly constitutional way ; but it seems that there is a doubt about this, for, from the Hew Zealand Times we quote the following remarks, which, if true, may cause the necessity for the work to be done over again. Our contemporary says:—

“ The interest taken in the sitting of the Court of Review culminated in a scene yesterday, when the dignity of the Reviewers was much disturbed by two or three objectors claiming to get admission to their presence. Although the ‘ scene ’ was a small one, and a little vulgar, still it was significant. The President of the Court reminded the intruders that the Court was acting under the powers given to it by the Act; that nothing was assumed without authority, and that the turn of this particular citizen to be heard would come in due time. But somehow or other it had gone abroad among these objectors that the Court of Review was not probably constituted, and from an examination of the clauses of the Act suggested by this pervading opinion it appears to be well founded. Under the heading Regulations (clause 11), the Governor in Council may from time to time, make, alter, and revoke regulations not inconsistent with this Act, for the following purposes or any of them: 1. Prescribing the duties of the commissioner, deputy-commissioner, assessors; and other officers engaged or employed in the administration of this Act. 2. Regulating the forms and times of giving notices of objections. 3. Regulating the manner of proceeding, to hear and determine such objections, and for the allowance of claims to exemption or deduction. There are two other subsections, but they are immaterial to the present purpose. The fourth has reference to statement of property, &c., and the fifth to penalties for breach of regulations. The main question is, whether the Governor in Council has made regulations under this Act, and if so, whether these regulations come within the third subsection, viz —‘ regulating the manner of proceeding to hear and determine such objections, and for the allowance of claims to exemption or deduction.’ We have heard it confidently stated that the Governor has made no such regulations. If that be the case, how can the Court of Review, as at present constituted, claim to derive authority ‘ for the allowance of claims to exemption or deduction,’ or decide upon a matter which falls within a code of regulations expressly prescribed by the Act as necessary to the validity of any decision, but which regulations have not been made. The point is undoubtedly .a ihost material one. We think there is much to be said upon it. No doubt the Reviewers will find sufficient in the Act to justify them. But as there is a doubt in the public mind as to their authoritv, it might be as well if they would give a categorical and a public answer to the question raised.”