THE WELLINGTON FENCING ACT.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume 3, Issue 112, 12 November 1859, Page 3

THE WELLINGTON FENCING ACT.

To the Editor of the Saivlce's Bay Herald. Sib, — Your correspondent "Jastus" has taken up the cause of the Wellington Fencing Act in so fair a spirit of discussion, that I would again beg for space in your .Valuable "Open Column" fco speak more explicitly on this important subject. ■'"'.' "Justus" has fairly enough corrected a laxity of expression in my opinion, which I cheerfully amend by stating that "tliere are no means given .by the. Wellington. Fencing Act to. compel any per*fon not occupying his land, to pay half the cost of >§6ncing between the properties of Himself and neigh■:bour." ■ ■ v • The means which the act proposes to resort to in order to compel payment, arenas '■Justus" remarks, very clear and distinct, r iaamely, the sale of

a portion of the land, sufficient to cover expenses* as quoted by me, and I still contend that the sale of a sufficient or any portion, or the whole, of the land, without the consent of the proprietor or his assigns, is repugnant to tlie laics of Great Britain, and therefore that the Supreme Court, when appealed to, will not acknowledge the conveyance of the Eesident Magistrate, such being illegal, and until "Justus" can Bhew or prove that this law of the Wellington Council is in accordance with the law of Great Britain, he has not proved my opinion to be wrong. I have made no remark whatever as to the equity or desirability of this act, or that property unoccupied is raised in value by being partly fenced, as is the opinion of some, this is not the point. I simply state that the means resorted to in this case are contrary to the laws of Great Britain, and that therefore the conveyance of the Magistrates is illegal and worthless, and I deny that the Crown Grant is subject to any provincial laws or any other condition than is expressed therein, without the consent of the person legally entitled to hold, being duly obtained. FREEHOLDER.