WEST COAST LEASES.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LII, Issue 272, 23 December 1909, Page 4

WEST COAST LEASES.

" A PECULIAR PHENOMENON." REPORT BY COMMITTEE. The Lands Committee reported to the House of Representatives on Tuesday on tin; petition of D. A. Poole und 01) others, praying that they might ho granted payment for all improvements done by them upon the lands leased by them from the Public Trustee. The petitioners also asked for a perpetual renewal of their leases, and that in assessing upon any renewal of leases none of their improvements should be taken into consideration.

The committee reported thai the petition should be referred to the Government for consideration, with a recommendation that the proposals submitted by the Public Trustee and accepted by the petitioners be adopted.

The evidence taken by the committeo was attached to the report. R. i), Welsh, solicitor, llawera, deposed that 133 lessees' were interested in the petition, and there were over 18,0()U acres involved. All the petitioners were lessees under tlie West Const Settlement Reserves Act. When the lands were granted in ISBII and subsequently the lands were practically'all unimproved bush lauds, and some wen? overgrown with gorsc. The leases' wore granted "at the best improved rent obtainable." lull the lessees were bound to bring into cultivation certain portions of their lands. He urged that in construing the lease it was reasonable to read it that the lessee was to be paid for substantial improvements, including reclamation from the bush. The court, however, had construed the leas'e as being limited only to buildings, fixtures, and fences. Other evidence was given by 1). A. Poole, farmer, Auroa; lE. R. Hastie, farmer, Kaupokonui; Charles Andrews, Jesse Barrow, and J. W. Poynton, Public Trustee.

The Public Trustee admitted, in evidence, that when these leases were granted under the Act of 1881 a mistake ■was made. Provisions should have been incorporated in the leases, because it ■was quite absurd to have leases given to hard-working men like some of the settlers present, and have something else of an important nature buried away ill the Gazette. It was not the way it would be done now, and the fault lay there. By section 8 of the Act of 1892 it was distinctly stated that where the lessee converted his lease his right to improvements' was limited to £5 an ncrc. Anything beyond £5 per acre ?ie had to pay to the Native owner. Over one hundred tenants accepted and ■understood those conditions. Over one hundred tenants surrendered their and either paid cash for the imprnvc■rncnts over £5 per acre or executed a mortgage. " Until'those gentlme: . ame to sec me the other da v." -,.iul Mr. "Poynton, "I had not tlir lightest idea that the tenants did not know their position. It is an extraordinary thing that in a community of lessees' there should be such a number who surrendered their leases, who considered their position and decided to oome in, and the solicitors who considered the position did not understand it. It is ft peculiar phenomenon. It seems as if the whole community were affected with mesopopamia, or, in other words, loss of memory." The office had sent circulars round, successive Public Trustees had sent advertisements to the tenants and advertised in the papers giving notice to the tenants of their right to convert, and there could be no complaint against the office since 1881. lie had suggested in his' report that in order to get over the difficulty any of those who did not know of their position should have the full right of all improvements as at last March. Last March the decision was given in Tinkler's case, so that they must have known their position then, and if they had made any improvements since then beyond £5 per acre they were very foolish. The suggestion that they Should conic in under the Act of 1802 by paving the difference between what they were paying and what they should have paid to-day was a very fair one. To pay them for all improvements would 'he to put them in a much better position than those who had come in under tile Act of 1892 and paid the office for improvements more than £5 per acre. He would object to that. The tenants should get full improvements up to £0 per acre. There should be no change of tenure which .would deprive the Natives of the opportunity of reoccupying the leasehold.

' The proposals to pay for all improvements as existing on March 31, and to allow the les'sees to change their leases from the Act of 1881 to that of 1892, were, approved by the petitioners, on the understanding that each lessee would have twelve months wherein to elect if lie would avail himself of cither of these options, If legislation was to be cnauted on these lines the petitioners suggested that it was all important that the. improvements as on March 1 should he valued immediately. The lion. T. Y. Duncan, chairman of tho committee, moved that the committee's report, together with the evidence, he laid on the.table. The Hon. James Carroll moved an nmendment to refer the jietition to the Native Affairs Committee, which was the committee, lie said, that ought to deal with it

Several members objected that this 'would mean deferring the matter till 'next session.

After a prolonged discussion tli hmendment was carried by 43 vot( to 20.'

Mr. Massey Baid there was n yen | strong feeling on the part of memherthat the object of the amendment wa: to prevent anything being done this Session or during the recess, Mr. Carroll: I give that au emphatic denial.

Mr. Massey said he was very glad to hear .that. He hoped the report of tiie Native Affairs Committee would conic down at such a time this session as would allow it to be dealt with in the ordinary way.—-Dominion.