SEASONS "WANTED.

Otago Witness, Issue 1241, 11 September 1875, Page 11

SEASONS "WANTED.

Mr Edward Murphy had lately got an extension of lease of the land held by him at the Clutha Sand-spit. The XJnder-Secretary, under date the 9th inst, wrote : —

Will the Chief Commissioner, Waste Lands Board, be good enough to state, for the information of his Honour, the reasons which induced the Board to recommend the extension of Edwaid Murphy's lease, at the instance of Messrs Connell and Moodie. The Chairman could not explain to the Government the reasons of the Board ; they were those of the majority, and not his. Mr Bastings : We can't attempt to explain : we have so many reasons for all we do. Mr Strode remarked that the Superintendent asked for reasons because the Act required that the matter should be done with his consent. There was some reason in the request. Mr Bastings remarked that it might be as well to i>ostpone all business in which the Executive was concerned till such time as Mr Reid returned. There should be an Executive member at the "Waste Lands Board table, who would state the Board's reasons to the Executive.

The Chairman said it struck him that Mr Murphy was the proper person to explain to the Government.

Mr Bastings remarked that they could only explain through their Chairman. _* . The Chairman remarked he had opposed Mr > Murphy's application. • Mr Bastings was understood to say members would trust the Chairman, though he had opposed Mr Murphy's application, to state the reasons correctly. The matter was postponed. FKE-EMPTIVE RIGHT.— KE-CONSIDERATIOS.

MrM'Kellar's application for the exercise of his pre-emptive right of 640 acres on run 163, section 1, block X., Crookston district, was brought under the Board's notice for reconsideration.

The facts of the matter are briefly these : — An application was made in 1871 by Mr M'Ketlar, through his agents, Messrs Cargills and M'Lean, for a piece of gronnd situate upon Mr M'Kellar's run. From tbe wording of this application it would appear that this land was applied for as a pre-emptive right. This ground applied for, apparently as a pre-emptive right, was situate in a part which hud been proclaimed a Hundred, and which was oj>en to purchase at the time by anyone who would apply for it. On the same day on which MrM'Kellar bought this land, 11,000 acres of land were purchased in the locality. Subsequently, an application for a pre-emptive right was made, on account of Mr M'Kellar, for 640 acres oh the run. This application was refused when made to the Board in November last, on account of its being considered that the previous application was for a pre-emptive, and no explanation being made then. It was now explained that the first application was not one in the nature of a preemptive right at all ; that Mr M'Kellar had given no one any authority whatever to apply for a pre-emptive right for him ; that the words *• for pre-emptive right on run 163," written on the face of the application, had been inserted in mistake ; and that the first application was merely intended as one for ordinary rural land, and not for a pre-emptive. Mr Haggitt, who appeared for Mr M'Kellar, spoke to show that the first application was not for a pre-emptive right. In support of this he referred to what had been done, and called tpedal attention to the fact that whereas he ould have had 12 months' credit in a premptive right he had paid cash immediately for lel&nd. Mr CiiABK was understood to say that when 1; case came up twelve months ago it was fcught there was some little dodging in the fitter, he Chairman said it struck him. so far as Btßxsw of the case, that everything had been do in good faith, and it was afterwards found th£| mistake had been made. * Sxbode remarked that the circumstances tae^ere now made aware of were not explained On occasion. TlChairman was inclined to think-that if Ml? Bf ellar was inclined to force the matter at la'jg could force them to give frfon a preempti i 2&J- tiode pointed out that Mr M'Kellar Could l ha Ye exercised his preemptive right in a n^-ed, and that he had paid cash. These two cUnstances were quite sufficient to entitle nil, the consideration Mr Haggitt asked i v r >ecu a Busted* a^ through, in selling the « as a pre-emptive right under that appjicati. Mf H%t said really there was no such obJectM ftuark geemed to auspect. The CdmAN remarked there had been gj-etrt dang,f j te i^g duplicated, namely, of there bein&. 0 applications in for the same land. .« Mr^ ASll ' remarked it was quite a slip that the actions had not been "duplicated, " It Wne o f the most valuable land to the cotrnti £23,000 had, in his opinion, been made wjay by the selection of that gtatmd, -utßoardwere legally bound to give the land, wu id support doing so. The CHAIBJ Vas o f opinion that the Board was legally boi MrBASTDEGSjjgfct the matter mig^ be refewed tothe Solicitor. Mr HsggittOfcea to the matter being re. ferred to the I^ai Solicitor, or to any one eIHB-it was a ve r f or the Board to deal with— one the Jj wa!s specially appointed under the Act to Mr Strode ren, d t j, at there were many things which peojvere specially appointed *°&> S* l^ 011 Wicitors did, Mr i Haggitt sal was tbe bare queß ti on whether the nrstjiicatjon contained the *wdß "forpre-ea, ri ht » I^,^^^ or that the first appl^ had nevt £ b tarn toV**-*™» a poi,; theßoard! It was torn! mistake get in Mr M'Gowk (the CW. -™u^. Mn _ fcr hug handwriting. ;?&SSi£ M-Lean. It waa first in, JSJX the land as a pre-emptive^,^ *?&, f °? was afterward found to bsj 11 * tH Kitfcer the application wa^Stf^ the words aaf they were n*f k 8 2 e °u was forgotten to make ap> k ° ut /, or » fc The application had not Tfe*S J° Bn°!8 n °! Mr Strode considered that Mnti . a ui a light, Mr M'Kellar was enti. e %™J, c emptive. we P re * It was resolved that the app. Nt na nA May, 1871, be corrected, o»#£™