LAND BOARD.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 9563, 20 October 1892, Page 4

LAND BOARD.

The weekly meeting of the Land Board, held on Wednesday, was attended by Messrs J. P.

Maitland (Chief Commissioner), H. Clark, W

Dallas, J. Duncan, and A. M'Kerrow.

Nenthorn. —Messrs Murray, Roberts, and Co., on behalf of Mr Thomas M'Lay, lessee of small grazing Run No. 171, Nenthorn, applied for his exemption from residence on the run, and for permission to reside on his freehold within 10

miles of the run.—Consideration of the request was deferred for a week.

Naseby.—Mr W. F. Inder, on behalf of Mrs Elizabeth Hore, requested that section 32, block 11, town of Naseby, be offered for sale. The Town Clerk applied to have the section reserved from sale, being required by the council for road purposes.—lt was decided to withhold the land from sale for the present, and to request the council to forward a tracing showing why it was necessary to take the street through the section in question.

Boundaries of Runs.— Messrs Murray, Roberts, and Co., on behalf of Mr H. Buckland, requested that the boundaries of Runs 171 a and

171b, and small grazing Run 10S be extended so as to include the portion of Crown lands—about 535 acres—at present lying between their boundaries. —The adjustment of the boundaries was agreed to on condition that the lessee pay additional rent pro rata for the increased area.

Islands in the .Waitaki River.—The Under-

secretary for Lauds requested the board to again consider the question of leasing the islands in the Waitaki river.—Consideration of the matter was postponed for a fortnight. Nenthorn.—Mr T. K. Sidey, on behalf of Mr John Sidey, jun., requested that when the small grazing Run Ifi9 was submitted to auction it might be offered subject to payment of half cost of dividing fence between that run and sections 1, 2, 3, and 4, block IV, Nenthorn district.—The request was declined.

Payment op Arrears.?— The Receiver of Land Revenue reported that Mr G. Thomson, whose occupation of license No. 297 was cancelled on the sth inst., had now paid arrears, and requested that the cancellation might be rescinded.—The cancellation was rescinded accord™g}y- ~_■_.. .. _ . .

Wanaka.—Mr John Fitzgerald applied for village settlement land on deferred payment— section 23, block XIV, Lower Wanaka.—The application was approved. Woodland District.—The application of Joseph Gwynne to transfer half interest of section 4, block IV, Woodland district to Win. Gwynne was approved.

Coal License Forfeited.—The coal license held by Archibald Leckie in respect of two acres in block V, Kyeburn, was declared forfeited, the licensee having failed to take it up. Expenditure of Thirds. —The Tuapeka County County Council forwarded a supplementary list showing upon what roads it was intended to expend money accruing from deferred payment and perpstual leases.—The road lines were approved.

Mr J. J. Ramsay appeared before the board in reference to the expenditure of thirds accruing from the blocks in the Hyde section of Macraes riding, Waihemo County. Mr Ramsay said that he represented the settlers in the whole section, but particularly those in block 111, Rock and Pillar district. He stated that he could not add

much to what he had already written to the board on the subject. The position the settlers took up was, first, that they had been defrauded of their thirds; and, secondly, that the board had a duty to perform as provided by the act —viz., to protect the settlers, so that their funds would be expended in a manner that would benefit the

whole of the block. The funds were returned by the Government for a specific purpose, and that was to open up the block. The Land Board took

up the position that the settlers should approach the council, but the settlers held that the council should spend the funds without being approached at all. If the council did not perform its duties as laid down by act of Parliament, it was then the duty of the settlers to approach the board. This was the proper course to pursue. If it were not, the act would not have made it necessary that councils should obtain the board's sanction before thirds could be expended. With regard to appealing to the council, the speaker's late father, and subsequently he himself and some of the settlers, waited a number of times upon the council with respect to the expenditure of the original Government grant towards the erection of a footbridge. After fighting the matter for three years the whole tiling was referred to the Surveyor-general at Wellington, and then the wishes of the settlers were attended to. ' . . * The Chief Commissioner: You have got your., representative, I suppose? Mr Ramsay : No, we have not. The geographical position of our section of Macraes riding cuts us out from community of interest^with the rest of Macraes riding of which our blocks form part. The speaker then went on to state that the settlers wanted an outlet to Middlemarch, whilst the council persisted in spending the money on the main road to Palinerston. He had been living in block 111 for some six years, and to his knowledge not a sixpence of their thirds had been expended in giving them an outlet from it during the whole of that time. The position they occupied was au extremely hard one, or else they would not have appealed to the board. The hardships the settlers of blocklll had to contend with were not peculiar to that block, but he had confined himself to that particular block in making definite charges, because he could certainly prove them. There was a similar grievance in block VII, on which he also spoke. The Chi<-f Commissioner: You appear for those settlers to-day as well ? Mr Ramsay: Yes; we make the charge in respect of the whole of our section of the riding. I am well aware that the question is a difficult one. It is a very wide one, but it seems, to me the board will have to protect the settlers.. r ''>, ~ , , The Chief Commissioner said that so far as the position of the board was conceroecT it had come to the conclusion that in event of any complaint being made by a ratepayer or a body of ratepayers as to the expenditure of rates, such complaint should be brought before the body who was empowered by law to deal'with it. Mr Ramsay said that he agreed with Mr Maitland that such was the proper course to take in respect of any complaint but the one the settlers were now making. The settlers were practically charging the council, and they were asking the board to decide whether the council had done wrong in spending the thirds accruing from their block in the manner they had done. The Chief Commissioner : You want us to decide whether the council has spent the thirds in a manner provided by the act ? Mr Ramsay: Yes. The Chief Commissioner: There may be circumstances surrounding the case which would make it impossible for the board to arrive at an accurate decision. Mr Ramsay said that as for himself ho did not want to deal with the council any more. It took the settlers four years to get LliOO —money allocated by the Government when the block was opened—expended. The act provided that the thirds should be spent on roads within the block, or opening up the block for the benefit of the settlers. The words '' leading to " the block were used, and the question arose what was the definition of the phrase. The Chief Commissioner said that so long as the county council kept within the limits of the law the board could not interfere. The council should be better able to_ judge as to the requirements of its own district, and the best way to open up the various blocks. It would be a difficult thing for the board to interfere in the matter, and the interference would be resented by the council. The latter was appointed for the very purpose of determining such questions. Mr .Ramsay thought it was the duty of the board to protect the settlers, if the council would not attend to their wants, as was the case iv the present instance. The Chief Commissioner observed that the

board understood Mr Ramsay would have produced some proof of the settlers having gone to the council on this question, and would have stated in what manner the. conncil had not acceded to the request of the settlers. Mr Ramsay unfortunately had none of the correspondence that had passed between him and the council with him. If he had it available, the board would be occupied all day in reading it over. The Chief Commissioner stated that the council denied receiving any complaint which had not received consideration at its hands. . Mr Ramsay replied that iif the council denied that the matter was not brought under its notice it was simply quibbling. The Chief Commissioner could not conceive any right the board had in stepping between a dissatisfied ratepayer or body of ratepayers and a county council to consider some action of the latter. Mr Ramsay : We don't take up the position of ratepayers at all, but of settlers. We look upon the council holding our funds as trust funds, and we consider the board should see that our'moneys are expended properly. The Chief Commissioner suggested that the settlers should formulate the reasons they had that the council should expend the funds in a certain way, and that they should then lay their statement before that body. Before they did this the board could take no action. Mr Ramsay : The board should ask the council not to spend the money in a manner prejudicial to the interests of the block. The settlers will not stand it any longer. We'll rise in arms. The matter will have to be referred to some higher authority. We cannot get any satisfaction from the council. Mr Dallas said that the settlers should ask the council to spend the thirds in a particular manner, which in their opinion would tend to the best interests of the block, and if this were not done the board would then see what action it could take.

Mr Duncan remarked that the board could get from the council a statement of all the expenditure of thirds accruing from this block. Mr Ramsay said that supposing the whole of the settlers in a certain block asked to have thirds expended iv opening a block in a certain manner, and the council refused to recognise such a request, what then ? Mr Dallas said that under such circumstances he would consider that the council was not doing its duty. The Chief Commissioner then repeated the suggestion he had already made. Mr Ramsay promised to bring the matter before the settlers, who no doubt, out of respect to the board, would fall in with it. The Chief Commissioner said that from whatever motive they did as he suggested, he thought it was the best course to take. Sir Kamsay then thanked the board and withdrew.