THE HIGHLAND PARS ESTATE.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1747, 30 August 1905, Page 2

THE HIGHLAND PARS ESTATE.

MRS RHODES’S PETITION TO THE LEGISLATURE.

THIS LOST DEED EOXJND

Pursuant to a notification, Mr H. D. Boil, acting for Mrs Sarah Anne Rhodes, of Wellington, and Mr Win. Barton, of Eeatherston, two of. the trustees of the will of the late Hon W. B. Rhodes, and Mr 0. P. Skerrett, representing the Onslow Borough Council, and several witnesses summoned by both sides attended at the House of Representatives last Wednesday, the former with a petition against a ruling of the Supreme Court in an action with the Onslow Borough Council (with respect to .certain roads or strips of land which travel through the Highland Park Estate, on the \\ adostoiw road), and the latter to furnish evid ~ee of the Council's claim, substantiated in the Supreme Court. a tie Lands Committee did not sit yesterday, and the hearing of the petition was adjourned until Wednesday next. The petition sets forth that by the last wi.il and testament of the late Hon W. B. Rhodes, dated February 9th, IS7B, j'.i i-s Rhodes became beneficially entitled, during her life, upon certain conditions, to all the estate and interest of the testator in lands at AVadestown known as

ihe Highland Park Estate. The testator became possessed of the estate in the J allowing manner; —James Watt ami .nohn Wade, being the holders of a preliminary land, order No. 32, issued by toe New Zealand Company in August, i8 ; 19, and subdivided lot No. 1. prior to ebruary 10th, 18-13. Such subdi vision comprises part of Use Highland Park Estate, the allotments containing about anlr-nn-aere each, and certain strips of land giving access to each allotment were snown as roads on the plmi apiiendcxl to she petition. \V. R. Rhodes became en■M led by purchase prior to August Ist, N. to (lie fee simple of eighty-four of such seel ions. Portion of the block thus acquired lay to the north of the proposed sheet to be called Wade street, and east °i George si reel, w ith the exception of two or 1 li reo lots only and one Henry i Nuniaei Knowles, became entitled to the oi lier portion of the block lying I o tile oon.n o; Waile ulivii. and west of George street. These (wo ge.-it leiiK'n then a skid •loli'i \\ ade and .!; mes Watt to convey q* i imni the so l l of 1 lie said proposed si rei is or roads, which was done. Those W'eie proposed io i>c railed .fame's street. Grad lord s( reel, Hire short. Casth rvagii a. 11 lerivn-e, and so nun-h of i.j.e md i’n' ima road a..-: la v between \\ tide s ‘ l ami its juncl ion with < ’-eo-igo ami also (lie eastern purls of the ri.i-iin ue of nidi rend, and ‘"f GeorgeMreri. from W ade ,-.l reel io i(s Junet.ion ! 1 a i he i "ori run road. vr.'i i conveyed subject. nowevor, Io such rsgh(t> of us- , ;, ud :• - nvci (hr same as mnv

have been then legally existing in any person or persons whomsoever. Such strips of land were shown on no Crown plan, and were shut in by fences and hedges until 1872, when a survey was made for the purpose of issuing Crown grants. By Crown grant, dated August 10th, 1853, lot 125 was duly granted to one Win. Villiers, from whom Mr Rhodes purchased, and in this Crown grant Hope street and Porirua road were described as “private ways.” . - . After the death of Mr Rhodes, his widow on several occasions requested rhat search might be made for the discovery of a document which she understood from her husband existed which would evidence bis title to the strips, but she was informed by the Crown authorities that after search no such, document could be discovered. The Commissioner of' Crown lands also informed her to the same effect.

In 1803 the Onslow Borough Council commenced legal proceedings against Mrs Rhodes, claiming that the strips of land were public roads, existing at the date of the constitution of the borough, and as such were vested in the Council by force of the Municipal Corporations Act. Judgment was given in the Supreme Court in favour of the Council.

Since the said judgment the Crown authorities have discovered in their possession the deed of August Ist, 1818, and the same is n-ow available for productionbut, except direction be given by Parliament. the discovery of the deed has been made too late to be of avail, as it should have been to the petitioners.

The grounds upon which the petitioners pray relief from Parliament are as follows:

(1) The strips of land were never used as public roads and were also enclosed. (2) The said strips of land were never anything else than private ways' as evidenced by the Crown grant to Villiers, which was issued to Villiers in 1853. (3) Tlie Commissioner whose duty it was jto investigate the titles was clearly satisfied that the strips bad been originally private ways, and the rights thereover had been extinguished. (4) The Commissioner at the time he made bis report had before him the conveyance of the Ist day of August, 1818. as well as the other convevance to Mr Rhodes of the other allotments. (5) By some extraordinary accident the deed of August Ist, 1848, which had been before the Commissioner, had been mislaid, and accordingly the Crown grants were issued in 1872 in error, showing thereof as roads strips of land which had become vested in Mr Rhodes- by conveyance of Avhich the Crown authorities when issuing the grants had, by reason of such accident, no knowledge. (6) But for the repeal by Parliament of the New Zealand Company’s Land Claimants Ordinance, 1851. by the New Zealand Company’s Land Claimants Act, 1892, asi amended by the New Zealand Company’s Land Claimants Act. 1532. Amendment Act. 1894-, and as finally established by the Repeals Act, 1892, it would have been competent for the petitioners to insist upon a. supplementary grant of the said strips; the claim of the said William Barnard Rhodes had been put in within due time; it had been evidenced by proper deeds; and it was only the loss of the deed in the Crown Lauds Office which prevented the Commissioner’s report taking full effect at the date of the issue of the grant. (7) The petitioners are now wholly without remedy because the strips of land in respect of which a claim has been duly made to the Commissioner have been actually shown on their grants as roads, and have been declared by the Supreme Court to be therefore public roads, and because by the action of Parliament in abolishing the only tribunal to which they could have recourse, namely the Commissioner under the New Zealand Company’s Land Claimants Ordinance. 1851, they cannot now establish their right, and this loss vour petitioners have suffered by reason of the fact that the deed which had been produced to the Commissioner had been lost bv officers of the Crown after the Commissioner’s report and before the grant.

The prayer of the petition is for Parliament to enact that a Crown grant for the said .drips or land, which would have been issued to the said AYR B. Rhodes, but for the loss of the said deed, and which the petitioners would still be entitled to claim but for the repeal of the New Zealand Company Land Claimants Ordinance, 1851, shall be now' issued to the petitioners or in the name of the said YV. B. Rhodes for the benefit of the petitioners.