THE PRESS. MONDAY, MAY 13, 1872.

Press, Volume XIX, Issue 2817, 13 May 1872, Page 2

THE PRESS. MONDAY, MAY 13, 1872.

The Provincial Secretary gave notice of a motion at the beginning x>f the present session, to the effect that His Honor the Superintendent should be recommended to issue a proclamation bringing the Highway Boards Empowering Act, 1871, in force in all the road districts within the province of Canterbury. "We do not know what became of the motion. It was not moved at the time for which notice had been given, Friday, May 3, at least there was nothing about it in the reports of the proceedings on the following morning; and it seema since to have disappeared from the order paper. Perhaps some member of the Provincial Council will enlighten us as to its fate.

The Act in question was passed by the General Assembly last year for the express benefit of Koad Boards. These bodies are in all cases indebted for their existence, and for whatever executive powers they possess, to provincial legislation ; but unfortunately for them, the power of Provincial Councils to legislate on their behalf is defective in several important particulars. The Court of Appeal has decided that by the 19th section of the Constitution Act, Provincial Legislatures are debarred from giving ratepayers any right of appeal from the assessment or other action of a Koad Board to the established Courts of the colony, or to constitute any new tribunal to hear and determine such appeals. Nor have they the power of enabling Road Boards to impose penalties for breach of bye-laws, or tv rate land held under lease from the Crown, or to take land compulsorily for public purposes. A large number of Provincial Ordinances, which exceeded the powers of Provincial Councils in these respects, have been declared illegal. For several years they have been kept alive from year to year by an annual Validating Act. But the Assembly has, very properly, resolved to discontinue the validating process, and has instead itself passed an Act making provision for the hearing of ratepayers' appeals, and giving the Eoad Boards the powers

(beyond what can be conferred by the Provincial Council) which are necessary to enable them to perform their functions. This was done by the Highways Boards Empowering Act. It can be brought into force, either wholly or partially, in any or all the Road districts in a province, by proclamation issued by the Superintendent upon the recommendation of the Provincial Couucil.

The Act—that is to say, its operative portion—is divided into six parts. They deal respectively with the rating of Crown lands, appeals against and recovery of rates, the making of bylaws, the construction of main roads, the trial of validity of elections, and the power of taking land for permanent works.

The first part places all Crown lands in any district, sold or granted, or occupied under license otherwise than for gold mining, together with all native land in the occupation of any other than an aboriginal native, on exactly the same footing as regards liability to rates as any other rateable property in the district. The paßtoral tenants of Crown lands are to be rated at one-balf the value of this land for pastoral purposes, including all improvements.

The second part is one of the most important. For any ordinary complaint, on the ground of unfairness or incorrectness in the valuation or measurement of property, it gives the complainant a right of appeal to the nearest Resident Magistrate or Court of Petty Sessions, whose decision shall be final. In all other cases, the appeal lies to the District Court, or (if there is no District Court having jurisdiction in the district where the property is situated) to the Supreme Court. The appeal is in either case to be determined in a summary way, and to be conclusive. The Resident Magistrate has the power of altering the sum at which any person is rated, but not of wholly setting aside the rate The District or Supreme Court has, in addition, the power, if thought necessary in order to give relief to the complainant, of quashing the rate. All the Courts have the power to award costs. Here however we notice a proviso to which we take exception. According to the Act, no costs are to be awarded to a successful appellant, unless the sum at which he is rated is reduced by the Court by at least one-fifth. If, for example, a person is rated at £100, and appeals, he will not recover costs unless the amount is reduced to at least £80. Why not ? Any reduction at all is an acknowledgement that the original assessment was unfair. The appellant had therefore admittedly suffered a wrong, and why should he not obtain justice at the hands of the Court without being mulcted in costs. The Assembly seems to think that a ratepayer has no business to complain of any overcharge which does not exceed 20 per cent. Another singular proviso occurs with respect to quashed rates. The Act provides that the Court, after quashing a rate, may, notwithstanding, order it to be levied and recovered in the ordinary way, as though it had not been appealed against; and all payments shall be taken as payments on account of the next effective rate. This involves a strange contradiction. For it was expressly to meet cases where there was no other way of relieving the complainant (that is, where the rate was altogether bad) that the Act empowers the Court to set it aside. That the next step, after quashing the rate as bad, should be to enforce it as good, seems an odd sort of justice. True, the payment will be taken into account next year. But the owner may meantime lease or sell the property; he may even be under an engagement to lease or sell at the time the rate is quashed. In that case, he will be a loser without any hope of return. He will be compelled to pay the invalid deed, aud, as his only compensation, somebody else will be let off. He will practically be forced to pay the next year's rate for the incoming tenant or purchaser.

I> T a case heard last week before Mr Justice G-resson, a certain deed, which had been deposited in the Kegistry Office, was proved to hare been tampered with and altered while in the custody of the department. "We offer no opinion as to how or by whom this was done. But we understand that solicitors aud their clerks are habitually allowed access to the room where the deeds are kept, and are permitted to remain as long as they choose without any supervision by the officials. This is not as it should be. Such a practice affords opportunities for fraudulent dealing which may be taken advantage of, and which should under no circumstances be allowed. No one should on any account be suffered to enter the deed room, and the examination of any document should invariably take place in the presence of an officer of the department.

We have received the following letter contradicting a report that his Honor the Superintendent had communicated with the Colonial Government with reference to a dissolution of the Provincial Council: —

" Mr Eolleston presents his compliments to the Editor of the Press, and requests him to be good enough to contradict, as entirely untrue, the report which is stated in the Lyttelton Times of to-day to be ' on authority which there is every reason to believe authentic, that his Honor the Superintendent had communicated with the Colonial Government about a dissolution of the Provincial Council.'—Linwood, May 11th, 1872."