PROSPECTING LICENSE AT TAIRUA.

Thames Star, Volume XXIX, Issue 8566, 22 January 1897, Page 2

PROSPECTING LICENSE AT TAIRUA.

At the Warden's Court to-day Herbert Gordon, miner, of Thames, applied for a prospecting license under the Mining Act Amendment Act of 1896, for 36,000 acres at Tairua, known as the Tairua Block IV, XII, and XIII (Whitianga Surv»y district), and I, 11, V, and XI (Tairua Survey district). The land was denned as Crown land occupied by the Kauri Timber Company under timber lease or license, and the prospecting license was applied for to exist over a period of one year. The Kauri Timber Company objected on three grounds, -which may be briefly summed up under three heads: Saw-mill and buildings; dams erected in the creeks; flotage rights and standing timber.

Messrs Jackson-Palmer and Clendon appeared for the applicant, and Mr McCormick for the objector. Mr McCormick (for the Company) raised a question of jurisdiction. He said the application was laid under Section. 2 of the Mining Act of last session, which section he quoted. The Tairua block was Crown lan subject to a lease and timber grant, the benefit of which was now vested in the Kauri Timber Company. He therefore submitted to the Court that the block did not come within Section 2. It was not land alienated from the Crown prior to 1873, and it was not native land.

The lease (put in evidence) is dated 1872. Mr McCormick said the present case was expressly provided for in sections 29 and 30 of the Act. The Warden said under those sections the land could be surrendered, and if sot surrendered it could be resumed. . j Mr Clendon submitted that the Warden had jurisdiction under the Act. The question turned upon the meaning of the word alienation. That word was not qualified in the Act; it was not alienation in free simple nor alienation in less estate. The Company admitted that in 1872 the land was native land, and was then alienated to persona other than Her Majesty—which alienation was how in force. The word alienation was defined in the Native Land Courts Act of 1870, which was in force in 1872. Under section 4 of that Act an alienation was either in fee simple or less estate. Alienated, as used in section 2of the Act of 1896, applied to land which was native land at the time of the alienation. Mr Clendon quoted from the latter part of the section ■ " or, being native lands, were alienated from the native owners thereof to any person other than Her Majesty prior to August 30th, 1888." He contended that this meant" lands which were native lauds at the time of alienation."

Mr Jackson Palmer argued that sections 28 and 30, in providing for surrender on resumption, did not imply the exclusion of prospecting. Mr McCormick having replied, the Warden said that the object of the Act was to grant a new power to the Warden to grant prospecting licenses over private property. There was always the safety-valve of an appeal to the Supreme Court in questions of this sort. On the whole—though extremely doubtful—he thought it was his duty to assume that he had jurisdiction to grant th"c application, and the Kauri Timber Compaay could appeal to the Supreme Court to settle the quest son. At the same time he would advise the applicant to exercise extreme caution, or in the event of the ultimate resumption, his position might be more prejudiced still, and he might have to fight any chance comer who could raise the question of the Warden's jurisdiction, Mr Clendon stated that applicant did not desire the whole block, and the warden thereupon intimated that he had not the slightest intention of granting 36,000 acres. He would grant a prospecting license for about three times the area of an extended prospecting area, which in a previous Act was limited to 640 acres.

Mr Clendon said the applicant desired an area between two tributaries of the Tairua liver, which he pointed out oa the plan. The area applied for was absolutely denuded of all timber, and no timber right could be affected. The Warden said it would be necessary to attach a sketch plan of the area to the license. The applicant, having priority, could take his area anywhere he chose within the block. Mr McConnick said the objections raised by the Company were drawn up under the impression that the whole block was to be applied for. As there had been a great reduction in the area asked for, the first objection on the ground of the Company's sawmill and building w«uld be done away with, as the buildings were situated on anotherpartof i the block. The second objection, as regards the Company's dams, would also be dropped, as dams were no bar to a prospecting area. With regard to the objection re driving rights, Mr McConnick asked that the provision for the protection of the rights be inserted in all licenses.

Mr Palmer thought prospecting could not prejudically affect driving rights, and the Warden concurred. It was agreed that the matter of security against damage done was provided for in the Act, and should be secured by the licensee entering: into a bond. The Warden granted the application with, the following note:—''License to be issued for 2000 acres at spot indicated at hearing, a sketch map to be attached to license; security to be given under section 12 by bond of applicant and two approved sureties, amount to be settled by counsel, who may refer to the Warden if they cannot agree. Each party to pay their own costs." This is the first prospecting license under the Aot of 1896 granted on the Hauraki Goldfields.