The Deferred Payment System.

Waipawa Mail, Volume X, Issue 1034, 15 January 1887, Page 2

The Deferred Payment System.

There are a large number of deferredpayment settlers amongst our readers, and hence we think it well worth while to give the law as laid down by Mr Justice Williams, as affecting them upon a most important point. The Southland Waste Lands Board submitted for his Honor’s ruling the question as to whether a deferred payment settler who had capitalized could complete the purchase of his section before the expiration of six years from the date of his license. Judge Williams replied as follows :—“ I understand the selection (William Beunison’s) to have been of rural land, and to have been made iu June, 1883, and that capitalization took place in March, 188 G. I think, in order to answer the question submitted by the Board, it is material to consider what the rights of such a selector would have been if the Act of 1885 hnd not been passed. In that caee, I think section 10 of the Amendment Act of 1884 would have applied. It is true that the selector took up the land before the Act of 1884 came into Operation, and after the Act of 1882. I do think, however, that this circumstance makes section 60 of the Act of 1882 a part of liis contract with the Crown. Section GO, on the face of it, is merely an act of grace to deferred-payment selectors who cannot perform their contracts. It was quite competent, therefore for the Legislature, without any breach of faith, to alter from time to time the. terms on which relief should he given. Although then the right of this selector to get his grant under section 9 of “ The Land Act 1878 Amendment Act, 1879,” if he had paid the balance without capitalising, would be preserved l>y the saving clause in section 7 of the Act of 1884 ; yet, if after the Act of 1884 he wished to capitalise lie would then come under section 10 of that Act, and would have to complete tho six years. If that is so, there is no reason to suppose that it was the intention of tlie Act of 1885 to alter the rights of tho selector. Sub section 12 of section 14 would bo merely a clear expression of the saving clause in 6cctiou 7 of the Act in 1881. I am therefore of opinion that the selector in question is not entitled to become a purchaser until tho expiration of the full term of six j'ears repuiri d by sub-section 4 of section 126. This case, ns I understand, was subioitt- d by the Board of tlieir own motion, and l have therefore complied with the request of the Board that I should give my opinion without hearing counsel. The question, nevertheless, involving as it does the construction of sever d complicated Acts "f Parliament is on.- of some difficulty, on <1 it would have hern more satisfactory to mu lo luivo heard the mutter argued. L need l.ardlv point on', however, that tins opinion is' merely tor the guidance au 1 protection of the Iljatd

nn d that it in no way precludes parties from appealing under section 80 from a decision of the Board based upon it, nor does it in any way bind the Court when euch an appeal is brought before it.*’ Advocate •