The Lyttelton Times.

Lyttelton Times, Volume VI, Issue 371, 24 May 1856, Page 6

The Lyttelton Times.

SaUirday, Mai/ 24. The adjourned labours of the Provincial Council were resumed on Wednesday, the 21st inst., and on Thursday the house went into committee to consider the amendments proposed by Government. We certainly were anxious as to the result of the debate. It appeared to us to be a forthcoming conflict between popular inclination on the one hand, and an unpopular, though dignified assertion of the majesty of the law on the other. It was to us a matter of no little anxiety to learn whether the debate would result in a triumph of high principle over popular desire, or an undignified surrender to misguided and mistaken, though perhaps honest, prejudice. Ministers, by""their proposals, sought to inflict upon the holders of pre-emptive rights, what some of that class alleged to be a wrong. Although many of them will no doubt subscribe to the truth of our opinion that the maintenance of their tenure would be seriously inconvenient to the rest of the public, and although a majority of them may be perfectly willing to surrender such tenure in exchange for the terms offered by the Provincial Government, possibly feeling at the same time no great sacrifice involved in such a substitution ; yet if, on the other hand, a considerable number, or only a dozen, or even only one man, were dissatisfied with such an. arrangement, and to whom specific performance of the contract was preferable tc any alternative ; what in such a case should have been the procedure of an assembly to whom was confided the preservation of "the peace, order, and good government of the Province r" Should such an assembly immediately have proceeded without the fullest enquiry to confiscate his title ? Ought the desire or interest of overwhelming majorities, to have prevailed to extinguish the smallest property of the most insignificant citizen ? In order to answer this enquiry, our readers must first place themselves in the position of this one man. This one man believes himself to be in the possession of a right, for which he has paid the consideration stipulated between himself and the grantors. Before, therefore, any legislation having the effect of sweeping away his estate be initiated, would it not be absolutely necessary to first take advice of the highest authority in all law, as to the existence and validity of such asserted property? This course has not been adopted. No authoritative legal opinion in favour of the Government view of the question, was laid before the Council. Although during the debate on the first of the Government clauses, the opinion of the legal adviser of the Government was pointedly asked for, the only answer was, that the law adviser of Government perfectly concurred with ministers and approved the clauses. The question was on the recent debate pointedly raised, Has the Provincial Council power to compel a surrender of titles to property which had existence previously to the creation of that Council r Doubtless the Council has powers of two kinds to deal with lands, one of which it derives from the Constitution Act, viz., a power implied by the 18th section, which enacts that "it shall be lawful for the superintendent of each Province, with the advice and consent of the Provincial Council there-

of, to make and ordain all such laws and ordinances, (except and subject as hereinafter mentioned) as may be required for the peace, order, and good government of such Province, provided the same be not repugnant to the laws of England." The other is a power which owes its origin to an act of the General Assembly (the " Waste Lands' Act") Avhich empowers the Governor to assent to, and by his approval make law, regulations affecting lands suggested by any Provincial Council. But these two powers are of a very different and totally distinct character; one an inherent, and the other a derivative power : the first, or inherent power, being confined in its operation to lands already alienated by the Crown, and consisting of a power to tax, or in other ways, under certain limitations, affect such lands as public policy might require. The second, or derivative power, grows out of an act of the General Assembly, which in none of its sections appears to have contemplated a retrospective action. In the Ist clause of that act will be found these words, "Provided alivays that any such regulations may be amended, altered, or repealed, by any regulations to he made and hereinafter contained." What can uuder any possible circumstances be the intention of this proviso ? After due consideration, we Arrive at the conclusion, that any amendment, alteration, or appeal, possibly contemplated by this proviso, had reference merely to the possible application of anew mode of dealing in arrangements that might from time to time be affected, after j sucb amendment &c. had been made. A moment's inquiry into the effect of a retrospective action being extended to such alterations, would convince us of the unreasonableness of such an application. We cannot, however, find any power in the Provincial Council competent to meddle with or nullify titles or tenures existing previously to the Council itself, and we certainly have yet to learn by what authority the Council attempts to act in a manner repugnant to the law of England. We again assert that the tenure of the holders of pre-emptive rights is assured by an English statute now in full force and unrepe&led—by the law of England. The Provincial Council has acted in excess of its powers. We fear that this week's proceedings of the Council will be an unfortunate chapter in our history. We had hoped to have seen a jealous regard for the maintenance of even the most trivial, if at the same time legal rights. We have seen, however, a decided inclination on the part of our local legislature to indulge,popular caprice at the expense of individual interests. At all events, there has been exhibited a precipitant disregard of what we consider to be the proper method of dealing with questions of such a nature as that which has lately occupied the Council. We lament the shortsightedness of our Council, and dread the consequences of this first recognition by them of the dangerous principle of repudiation.

We have just learned the complete success of the ministerial amendments. A grave error has been committed. We hope, however, this vexed questiou will not again be revived. Our own estimate of the pecu-^? niary value of preemptive rights wou!/'^i never have suggested to us the adoption of defensive proceedings with a view to their maintenance. We shall certainly dismiss for ever all idea of their resuscitation. Our sense of the duty which devolves upon the press to fairly disclose to the public any dangers arising from occult causes, has been conscientiously complied with. We now recommend a generous surrender of right the contested! possession of which, although it would be effective, would only be productive of a small pecuniary gain, at a far more than commensurate public expence and commotion.