THE SOUTHLAND LEASE.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LV, Issue 249, 11 March 1913, Page 3

THE SOUTHLAND LEASE.

MINERALS BELONG TO THE CROWN. By Telegraph.—Per Press Aroocfetfcro. J n verca rg i 11, Sll ml ay. At ihe Supreme Court ion Saturday Sir .losluni Williams gave judgment for tlie Crown in the Southland lease ease, I'i'igliton v. the Commissioner of Crown Lauds. Hie Court holding that Brighton was not untitled to the minerals on the lease-iii-j)oi-|K'tuity, which he had converted. His Honor sikhl that the original lease was a lease oPfche surface rights only, and Ihe the lessee was the fee-simple of land comprised in the lease. If tll(1 "purchaser was entitled to the conveyance ot the whole fee-simple of the land, includin"' the minerals, he would be entitled to something which was not included in his lease, and which lie had not paid for. Section 21 of the 11)12 Act did not appear to his Honor to give the lessee the right to purchase more than the fee simple of the land disused, viz., the land without the minerals would remain in the Crown. Referring to the Dennis case, which was quoted during the hearing, his Honor said that the decision in that case was hased on subsection 2 of section 177 of the Act of 1!)0S. In that case the Court of Appeal was constrained under that sub-section to put a meaning on the words, ''the land comprised in the lease," which was beyond their legal meaning, and covered something that was not in the lease. Section 177 of the IfiOS Act , had been wiped out of the Statute Book ! and might be treated as if it had never existed. It had been contended that the right of purchase given by the Statute should be construed liberally in favor of the lessee. His Honor thought that the true rule of construction was the other way. The Crown would not have been held to have granted anything more than the express words of the grant covered, and in the event of a doubtful construction the Crown would have the benefit of the doubt. It was nrat necessary, however, to involve that principle in this case. His Honor found that the plaintiff was entitled to a Crown grant of the land, exclusive of the minerals. Costs were not asked for bv the Attorney-General.