DISPUTED TIMBER

Gisborne Times, Volume LXXXII, Issue 12521, 5 April 1935, Page 7

DISPUTED TIMBER

UNALIENATED CROWN LANDS. .. SEIZED' BY CONSERVATOR OF ! .' FORESTS. 4 j 1( ;r ( . MINER’S RIGHT INVOLVED. (Pi ess A ssocin-tian WELLINGTON, April 4. The,Appeal Court today, was engaged hearing the case Black-water Mines Ltd,. Reefton, * v Francis William foster, Conservator of Forests. In January, 1934, the company removed 6917ft' of timber from a section of unalienatod Crown landk adjoining its sawmillin" area for use in mining purposes by the company 011 its special quartz; claim. The timber whs seized bv the Conservator • of. Forests and the company applied to tho Magistrate’s Court, Reefton, for, determination of the question of ownership. The Timber Company contended that as it was the holder of a miner’s right and! privileges it; bad the right to take timber for mining purposes from unalienated land in a State forest reserve without, obtaining a license under the Forests Act, 1921, an j amendments. The magistrate gave jud'gincrfc that the company had not this right, and that the timber belonged to the CroAvn. From this decision the appeal avc.s made. Mr IT. F. O’Leary, for appellant, contended that the company had a. miner’s right for its ewn rise to- cut timber on unalienatod Crown lands necessary for mining. The Solicitor-General, lor respondent,, urged that within four pegs of his claim a miner could take timber not. for commercial purposes but f° r tho purpose of carrying on mining operations. It was not disputed that there might ho mining on. State Forest lands, but continued tliC' SolicitorGeneral, a. miner could' not go to adjoining State Forest lands and: c-ut timber without obtaining the Commissioner’s: permission. It appeared to him that the appellant; was claiming a subside from the. State at the expense of the State Forestry Department. The Con'd reserved decision.