SUPREME COURT, WELLINGTON.

Taranaki Herald, Volume I, Issue 38, 20 April 1853, Page 3

SUPREME COURT, WELLINGTON.

Civil Sittings.

Wednesday, March 30, 1853. DORSET V. BELL. Dr. Evans applied on the part of the plaintiff for an injunction against the defendant, Francis Dillon Bell, Esq., Commissioner of Crown Lands, to restrain him from receiving applications, and frotn sell- ( ing land under the recent proclamations , nnd regulations of hie Excellency Sir G. Groy, (\t the reduced prices mentioned in the regulations. The learned Counsel stated in detail the scheme of the New Zealand Company with regard to emigration nnd sales of land, the different regulations issued by them, and the surrender by them into the hands of Government of their chatters and lands, whereby the liabilities and unfulfilled contracts of the Company devolved upon'the Government. That one of such contracts was that land should not be sold in the Company's settlements at less than £1 per acre, and that such land purchasers were entitled to the benefit of certain pasturage regulations over the waste lands of the Company. He stated that the plaintiff was the holder of three land orders, one selected, one unseleoted, and one corapen- { B ation scrip. That the plaintiff claimed in respect of such unselected land order a righ/of selection over the land which the Government might sell under the recent regulations, and the effect of the recent regulations would be to reduce the value of the land selected by him, which he considered was such an injury as entitled him to redress by applying for the injunction* Counsel laid gi?at stress upon the letters of Sir John Pakington to hw Excellency Sir George Grey, published in the recent Gazettes, as clearly showing that her Majesty's Government bad not delegated any authority to Sir George Grey to leduce the price of land. i

Ilis Honor nsked if notice had been given to the defendant, and if the application was opposed.

Mr. Sewell said that notice had bee.a ! given, and his Honor then stated that as ' ndvised, he considered ihe plaintiffentitled ' to the injunction, but the difficulty was in ] what form it should be granted. It was 'hi 9 opinion there was no power on the ' part of the Government to sell land for less than 20s. an acre, and though it might be presumption on bis part to say he did not concur in the opinion given by tho Attorney General and Solicitor General respect1 ing the contracts existing between the Company and their land purchasers, that opinion was adopted by her Majesty and ' sanctioned by Parliament, and he must take the law/as he found it. la his opinion it j would be beneflcal to sell the waste lands at sa. an acre, but he had no right to deprive another of his rights. This question could only be settled by means of the Legislature, and it seemed very improbable, therefore, that these powers would be delegated to the Governor. His Honor said the question was— has any power been delegated to the Governor to alter the price of laud. He did not think there had been, 'or that it had been contemplated. His Honor observed this opinion was given on an emparte statement, and he should exer-

die tho tight of -changing his.qpinion i/j sufficient grounds were shown on the other side. He mighs, also *ta»e for the informa-' tion of the public that writs of scire facial might be issued against persons purchasing .land 'under • these, •regulations, though, he should be very lot" to decide this quotum without previously referring to tlio Chic/ Justice.

We understand an application was mndc yesterday (Friday) on the part of the defenjant to si-t aside the order obtained by the plaintiff as above, and that leave has been obtained to move that the order be art aside, for irregularity on- certain ground?, winch motion will be heard on Tuesday next.