WASTE LANDS BOARD.

Tuapeka Times, Volume VII, Issue 388, 5 September 1874, Page 3

WASTE LANDS BOARD.

{From_ ike ' ' Guardian.") Tho_ usual weekly ' mooting of the Waste Lauds Board was held yesterday. Present : The Chief' Commissioner (Mr. Thomson) in the chair, and Messrs. Strode, Clark, Reid, and Butterworth. THE MINUTES. On the minutes of the previous meeting being read. Mr. Harris said that he wished to point out an important error which appeared in them. At the last meeting of the Board he appeared on behalf of M'Donald and Matheson. It was then stated that the Chairman had taken upon himself the responsibility of refusing their application, though it had been confirmed by the Board. The Chairman then stated that since the previous meeting his attention had beeu called, by Mr. Nicholson, to the fact that the land comprised in the application formed part of the Tuapeka basiu and ho had therefore taken upon himself temporarily to refuse the application, though it had been granted. Nothing vras then mentioned about a rehearing by any person. The Board would remember that he pointed out that the terms of section 18 was as follows : — " The decisions of the Board on all matters to be by it heard and determined shall, subject to the right of appeal to the Supreme Court, as provided in the Waste Lands Board Appeal Act, 1867, bo final and conclusive : provided always that the Board may, on the application of any person, grant a rehearing of any case decided by it, if it shall think that justice requires it ; and, on such rehearing, may revise, alter, modify, or affirm any previous decision in the same case." There was nothing at that time stated that* any application was made for a rehearing by any person whatever. There was nothing on the minutes to show that any person named Nicholson had been present. It was simply atated that Mr. Thomson had his attention called to the matter by a person in his department from whom he had received the information, that the land was part of the Tuapeka Basin. He (Mr. Harris) objected to the confirmation of the minutes, on the grounds that there had been MO application for a rehearing, and, if thoro liad beon any such application, it should have been minuted in the book, and heard the same way aa any other application. He found it now stated in the minute to Messrs. M'Donald and Matheson's application, that Mr. Nicholson had applied for a rehearing. He asked the Board what evidence there was in support of that statement. Mr. Connell, and several others who were present, could corroborate him m what he had said. The Chief Commissioner : I may say that I was under the impression that I told you that Mr. Nicholson came as one of the public, to object to this application. I therefore refused the application pro forma, in order that it might be brought before the Board. I mentioned Mr. Nicholson's name, and you might have called him if you liked. Mr. Harris : Then I submit that Mr. Nicholson's application should have been minuted like any other. If information came to the chairman from any officer of his department, that does nnt Ww 5 tbc nwiter within the operation of section 18. Perhap3 the chairman will read the minute to the Board. The Chief Commissioner then read the minute recorJed opposite to M'Donald and' Mathe3on's application. It was as follows :: — ■ ' Application refused, Messrs. Strode and Butterworth objecting; Messrs. Clark and Thomson supporting. Carried on the casting vote of the chairman, Mr. Nicholson hating asked me for a re-"h earing, the site beiug valuable to mining interests." Mr. Harris said he believed that, if the tor h»p wpre referred to the members of the BWd, they would find that the part of the minute referring to Mr. Nicholson having asked for a hearing was an interlineation. He objected to tho confirmation of that minute, as it was incorrect. There was no such application for a rehearing made. Mr. Butterworth (to the Chief Commissioner) : My impression was, that. Nicholson drew your attention to the matter. Mr. Reid : Would it not have been competent for a member of the Board to havo applied for a rehearing ? Mr. Harris : There was no such application madeMr. Strode : If Nicholson objected as one of the public, he ought to hare been present. Mr. Harris : It is not the duty of the Chief Commissioner to become councillor for any person who may apply for a re-hearing. - The Chief Commissioner : The question is whether the minute shall be confirmed or not. Mr. Harris : Will the Board hear what Mr. Conn ell's recollection of the matter may be ? I am sure there was no intimation of any application by any person for a re-hearing. Mr. Clark : I recollect the Chief Commissioner saying that ijfr. Nicholson had called his attention to the matter. Mr. Strode : There is no doubt of that. Mr. Harris : If that minute remains upon the book, it puts a false color on what took place at tho last meeting of the Board, when the matter was under consideration. I then intimated that it was the intention of the party for whom I appeared to take the matter to, the Supreme Court. It looked as if it were the intention of the Board to try to bring the matter within the 18tii clause of the Act. It was not stated at the last meeting of the Board that Nicholson, or any one else, applied for a re-hearing. The Chief Commissioner : Can we call in Mr. Nicholson ? Mr. Harris : No. It is what you stated, sir. Mr. Strode : It appears to me that the regular way, uuder that section, was for Nicholson to have attended before the Waste Lands Board, and not before the Chief Commissioner. An act done by the Board cannot be vetoed by the Chief Commissioner, but an act done by the Chief Commissioner may be vetoed by the Board. Mr. Harris, in support of his statement, wished to* say that in the whole course of his experience he had never known an application for a re-hearing to be considered by the Board unless it had been first entered on the minutes. He again asked that Mr. Connell might be heard. The Board decided not to hear Mr. Connell's view of the matter. Mi*. Clark -' ITlie minute records vrhat took place. Mr. Harris : Excuse me, it does not. If the Board have no other motive in view except what is fair and justj I think it should hear evidence on the point. Mr Strode : I think the minute ought to to show what took place and nothing more. The Chief Commissioner: I asked for a re-hearing on Mr. Nicholson's suggestion. Mr. Harris : No, no. Mr. Strode said, according to his view of the matter, the minute should run this way : — " Application refused (Messrs. Strode and Butterworth objecting, Messrs. Clark and Thomson supporting), Mr. Nicholson, of the Survey Department, having drawn the attention of the Chief Commissioner to the fact that the hind in question was reserved as the Tuapeka Basin." He would move this as an amendment on the minute. Mr. Harris said that,- when he called the attention of the Board to section 18) and argued that no application for a re-hearing had b ten made, lm argument was not combated by the Chief Commissioner on the ground that such application had becn'made, but on other grounds altogether. Mr. Strode . The simple question is, What really occurred on that occasion ? Mr. Eeid believed that it was competent . for any member of the Board to ask for a' re-bearing. The questiqn was whethei or not

the mombers of the Board were included m the terra " any person," in section 18 of the Act*. Would the fact of the word re-hearing not having been mentioned invalidate the case? Mr. Strode : We are sitting hero in a judicial capacity, and we must administer that Act as it stands, and we are bound by the same rules as ordinary Courts of Justice in matters relative to re-hearings and new trials. Mr. Harris: I would suggest that the matter between the Board and my client is whether the minute is a truthful or untruthful report. The question is not what constituted on application. I object to the truthfulness of tho minute., If the Board wish to escape the consequences of an illegal act, the minute in its present form will help them to do so. The question wa9 then put that the minutes be confirmed. Messrs. Butterworth and Strode said they would have to vote against such being done, as they could not agree with them. Mr. Eeid, not having been present at the former meeting o£ the Board, declined to vote. Mr. Clark intimated his intention of voting in favor of their confirmation/ The Chief Commissioner said that in this instance, ,as in the former one, he had the casting vote, and would give it in favor of the minutes being confirmed. Mr. Harris : I solemnly protest against that minute, and say it is an untruthful report of what took place. Mr. Clark : I think that is strong language. Mi*. Harris : You have refused to receive the evidence of disinterested persons as to what took place. A MI6BBPBESENTATION. The Chief Commissioner read the following minute :—": — " The Chief Commissioner to ask the attention of the Board to the expressions made use of by Mr. Harris : ' That the sooner the Waste Lands Board was done away with the better ;' ' The proceedings are illegal and iniquitous.' " He said that ho did not hear tho expressions fully himself, but they were reported in the " Daily Times." air. Harris : I may stato that here is another instance of most irregular and unfair proceedings on the part of the Chief Commissioner. He states now. in making a charge against me, that' he did not hear the words used. I now 'state that I did not use that word. What I said was that the proceedings were illegal and inconsistent, and that the sooner the Wa6te Lands Board was done away with the better. The Chief Commissioner: Tho report, then, was wrong. Mr. Harris replied that such was the case. He would not use the word iniquitous, whatever his opinion might be. The Chief Commissioner : I did not hear it myself, but it was put forth in the " Daily Times. Mr. Clark: Apart from that, however, I think the expressions used by Mr.Harris were very unbecoming. Mr. Harris : I think that any candid observer Will Olllv llßVfi tn rrvfW fo fhn mmiifra. of the Board for tho last three weeks. Mr. Reid : I do not think that the Board j sits here to listen to comments on its way of conducting the proceedings. If so, we shall soon have all Dunedin coming in here to see what is going on. The matter tlien dropped, Mr. Harris's statement, that he had not used the word " iniquitous," being considered satisfactory. Later in the proceedings, and after Mr. j Harris had left the room, the matter was again adverted to by the Chief Commissioner, "who said he felt bound to take notice of it ! when he saw it in the *' Daily Times." Mr. Strode believed the whole matter was I a mistake. If the term had been used he would have noticed it. The Chief Commissioner said there was no doubt about the words used towards him that day (yesterday) by Mr. Harris were such as one gentleman would not use towards another. Nor would Mr. Harris have dared to use them towards him privately. After some further remarks, it was agreed to erase this matter from the minutes. A SAW MILT. LEASE. Messrs. Garden and Petrie applied for a saw-mill liconse on land situated behind Pollock's saw-mill, Q-lenkenich. Messrs. Driver, Stewart, and Co., agents. Referred to the Ranger for a report. CASE POB THE SUPREME qOTJBT. Mr. Harris suggested that a case, setting forth the reversal of the approval oC the application of Messrs. M'Donald and Matheson for the purchase of section 39, Block XVIII., Tuapeka, West, should be submitted for the decision of his Honor Mr. Justice Chapman. The Board resolved that Mr. Harris might submit a case for the consideration of the Board, for submission to the Supreme Court, if he wished. ME. LANCASTER'S APPLICATION. The report of Ranger Hughan was read on the application of Mr. Richard Lancaster for a lease of 200 acres, including the bush about five miles above Beaumont. . . ■ Mr Connell appeared in, support of Mr. Lancaster's application. He said that the granting of the application was one of great, interest to the inhabitants of the Beaumont, Tuapeka, and surrounding districts, in order that they might be supplied with firewood. He read a petition signed by a large number I of persons in the district asking that the ap- ; plication might be granted. Mr. Haggitt, on behalf of Mr. Neil, on ! whose run the bush is situated, opposed the j application, and said that the applicant had applied for a lease for part of the land under clause 85, and for a license for the remainder under clause 91. He (Mr. Haggitt) knew that he might be met by thejobjection that, in all leases of pastoral land, timbered land was reserved. But such reserves were utterly worthless, as they were not clearly and specifically excluded, which was necessary to be dene in order to make them legal. The Board was not in a position to grant a lease, because the consent of the Superintendent, which was a necessary antecedent condition, had not been obtained. He also contended that the Board had no power to grant a license under the 91st clause, as the land applied for was not timbered land, but merely covered with burned scruK It was, lie believed, Mr. Cutten who first commenced the insertion of exceptions in pastoral leases. There was no authority in law for it. It was, not the intention of the framers of the Act to except every piece of scrub. He submitted that, as the bush contained only 15 acres of timbered land, it was not too much for station purposes. Mr ConneU said that it was a singular fact that, though the station occupied by Mr. Neil was a very old one not a stick of timber had been taken from the bush in question for station purposes. The power of the Board to grant the application was rather an important question. If Mr. Haj»gitt'a view of the matter was correct, it would amount to giving runholdera a monopoly of the bush. The application was refused. SHOTOVER. The application of Mr. William Sahine to exchange his lease of sections 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 33, 35, 36, block 11., Shotover district, under clause 62, was approved of . ' WAITAHt'NA EAST. \ A. letter was read from Mr Richard Bushe,, ' asking the Board to reconsider the application of G. Milne to- purchase sections 51, 102, 103, and 104.^block V., Waitahuna East) about 122 acres.^— Refused. Mr. H. L," Squires applied for a reconsideration J of Jbi^application to purchase section 47, block X,, Waitauun,& E,agt— Refused.

OLENKENICH. Messrs Connell and Hoodie, for Messrs J. I and T. Macfarlane, applied for the decision of the Board on their adjourned application for a saw-mill lease on Block XIII., Gleukenich. — The report of the Ranger to be had. APPLICATION FOB LAND ON GOLDFIELDS. Applications to purchase land on goldfields were dealt with as fellow : — Mr. Thomas Brunton section 30, Block XIX , Tuapeka Kast ; Mr. J. Mackay, section 60, Block VI., Tuapeka West ; Mr. John Tuckey, section 8, Block XX., Tuapeka East — refused. Mr. Thomas (fopwood, sections 4, 16, 1, 7, and 18, Block VII. , Waitahuna West — no power. Mr. James Cameron, section 40, Block VII., Waitahuna East — received and granted. The Board then adjourned until next Wednesday.