Untitled

Lyttelton Times, Volume III, Issue 111, 19 February 1853, Page 9

To the Editor of the Lyttelton Times, Sir, —In the columns of your paper of Feb. the 12th, I observe a paragraph to the following effect : —" Considerable uneasiness prevails with respect to what is to be done with the property of the Canterbury Association. There are rumours afloat that it is intended to dispose of the reserved lands round Christchurch," &c. This would, I fear, lead many to suppose that the said " reserved lands" formed part of the " property of the Canterbury Association," a conclusion which I think you will find few colonists assent to. I am perfectly aware, as their late Agent in conversation repeatedly admitted, that the Association claims a considerable amount of real property in this settlement, including, I believe, (besides the town reserves and parks, in or near Christchurch and Lyttelton) the Agent's house, land and emigration offices, barracks, store, jetty, wharves, Sec, &c, and that mortgages are understood to have been effected in England on the security, in part, of such property. But I think it behoves the colonists before admitting the validity of such ruinous claims on property purchased with their money, to enquire closely into the title which the Association can produce for it. Now I have no pretension to legal knowledge and have access to no documents but such as are open to all, viz., the Ist Canterbury Association Land's Act, dated August 14, 1850, the Letters Patent, dated November 13, the Terms of Purchase, and the 2nd Canterbury Association's Act, dated August 7, 1851. Now, as whatever powers the Association possess are confessedly derived from these documents, I will therefore proceed to examine—as far as common sense will enable me to do so —on what ground these apparently monstrous claims of 1 the Association rest.

The 2nd clause of the Ist Act empowers -the Association to dispose of land either by absolute sale or by pasturage licenses, subject to certain conditions, the Ist of which is—" That with the exception of such land as has or may hereafter be selected by the Agent of the -Association for the site of the capital, and of Harbour, and of port towns, and of such land, as may be reserved for works of public utility^ under tbe Terms of Purchase herein-before mentioned, all land shall be open for purchase as rural land." The 4th condition states that all unsold land shall be open for pasturage. The 7th clause states that five-sixths of the money obtained by sales or licenses shall be set apart according to the provisions in the Terms of Purchase. I gather from all this that the Association acquired from the Crown the tight to sell or let land to private purchasers or licensees, and tliat they were bound to apply the money so acquired in accordance with certain rules laid. down in the Terms of Purchase, none of whielx empowered them to expend one farthing in the purchase of land in Canterbury to be conveyed, to themselves. They have, it is true, a right to reserve land. for public services—which land so reserved, could be purchased by no one—but this power of reservation, as granted them by the Ist A.c£, gives them no right over the land beyond the purpose for which it was reserved. It may be said that the letters patent referred, to in the Ist Act, empower the Association to purchase and hold property in England and. New Zealand, and to sell or mortgage It at their pleasure. To make this apply to the land in question, the Association must be able to prove that they were purchased, paid for, and. conveyed to the Association at the period of reservation, which, it is notorious, was not the case. And that the Association did not believe themselves competent at that time to do so, may be fairly inferred from the fact that they vvere obliged to get a 2nd Act to confer sueli additional powers upon them. The Bth clause of that Act enables them to reserve and appropriate by deed lands for public purposes, provided at the date of eucli purchase the lands are unsold or unappropriated. Any lands answering to this last description which the Association may have purchased. would, I admit, come under the title of real ! property—which the letters patent empower them to hold and would be fairly liable to any mortgage they might choose to effect on them. They cannot, however, apply this title to the ! sites" of our public buildings or reserves as they I had been appropriated unpurchased long before ! the 2nd Act was passed. With regard to the claim understood to be set up for the town reserves of Christchurch, It is even more unjust than the one I have just discussed. j The Terms of Purchase state that the capital shall contain, exclusive of reserves for streets and public purposes, not less than 1000 acres for private purchase. Whereas Christcburch, exclusive of the part marked town reserves, the streets and squares, contains barely 300 acres . I The whole of the reserves must be added to this to make up the prescribed quantity. I would observe that all town lands were to be sold in half or quarter acre lots, at not less than £48 per acre. Does the Association pretendto have paid such a sum for them ? That th-e Association at one time considered these reserves to be part of the site of the capital is obvious, from the fact that in the conveyances to parties whose rural lauds abut on the town reserve, the road surrounding it is called town boundary. The conclusions I would draw from these premises are: Ist, That the Association, previous to August 7,1851, though empowered by the Crown to sell and convey land to others, did not and could not sell and convey to thenaselves as a body corporate, any land in Canterbury. 2ud, That they had power from the first, effectually to reserve and appropriate land for public purposes which theycan use for thepurposes for which it was appropriated ouly. 3rd, That I the Act of August 7, 1851, gives" them power, | for the first time, to reserve and convey to thernj selves as a body corporate (by paying for it out | of the miscellaneous and Ecclesiastical,funds), ; land for public purposes—which/effectually, makes such land real property—but the clause in the Act empowering them to do so, expressly excepts all land already sold or appropriated. Therefore all the reserves made previous to the I publication of that Act in the colony, not haviug

been conveyed by deed, are not real property, and caunot'be burdened with any debt incurred by the Association, and further, that it is too late for the Association to endeavour to purchase them. If they could treat such as real property they would have power to sell the very streets and roads in front of our houses, as well as the Jetty and the whole of the sea board at Lyttelton. . ; » Of course, the personal property of the Association, and the estates acquired subsequently to the Act of 1851, may be disposed of as they choose. But I think it but just that the income arising from the public property in the colony shouldin the first instance be appropriated to paying the Salaries of the Clergy and Officials who cannot be said to be over-paid for their work. I would not for a moment wish it to be supposed I advocate the repudiation of any just debt. But if the Association wish the Colonists, through the Provincial Council, to take on them their responsibilities they should be ready to lay before the Council the fullest account of the way in which they have been incurred; and secondly, the Members of the Provincial Council should be quite sure that after discharging their just liabilities in this colony, the surplus revenue at their disposal will be sufficient to pay the interest of the Association's debt sought to be saddled upon them. I trust the importance of the question at issue will plead my excuse for troubling you at such a length. I am, Sir, Your's &c, Z. Y. X. [ Christchureh, Feb. 15,1853.