Sawmill Areas.

Western Star, 8 May 1908, Page 1

Sawmill Areas.

MR MASSEY’S HOLDINGS

A QUESTION OF TITLE

An application was before tho "Land Board on Friday from Mr A- Jl. Wallis for two sawmill aroas '.i"Q.a and 179 c, situated at Grove Bush. I'h'ese areas are held at present by Mr If, A. Massey, and the question involved which the Board has to consider In giving a reply to ihe application, is a very important one. Mr W. Macalister, who. appeared in. support d the two applications, addressed the Board a t some length on the matter.. He had noticed on the order paper, he said, that the applications were described as relating to certain sawmill areas held by Mr Massey, but the very basis of his client's application was that these areas were not held by Mr Massey at all. Mr Massey might have had an interest in these areas alt some time, but foe had no interest now. Mr Massey'a title, if he ever had one, had. lapsed owingi to his failure to comply with: the conditions under which it was granted to him. There were two applications before the Board, each for 200 acres, with reserve areas of 600 acres, making a total for each area of 800 acres. Mr Wallis might have left the matter there. He had complied with all the regulations in making his applications and he might have chosen to throw the onus on the Board. The Board might grant the applications, but if on the other hand the Board refused them, they must bear the onus of saying why they have refused them. However, he (Mr Macalister) proposed to assist the Board by showing that Mr Massey had no title whatsoever to these lands. These areas for which Miti Wallis applied had been granted in the first instance in 1860 under the regulations of 1866,—the regulations made under the N.iZ. State For eats Act, 1885. These regulations were not so specific as those under which these areas were granted at present, but the Land Beard would at least assume that they we,re granted for the purpose ofv heifag worked The Board would not listen to any contention .which went so far as, to say that the mere..grantung of these licenses gave the grantee ~a right to the areas in perpetuity. If thait attitude were taken up the plain duty of the Boamd was to grant Mr Wallils' application, and leave Mki Massey to substantiate his: -.. position in a Court of law. It would,be monstrous if the country's forests were so be locked up in this way. The original grant was made in 1889, nearly twenty years ago. Surveys were made later, and licenses were issued, and valuation was paid on the whole areas. Now it seemed that Mr Massey took up the position that he was entitled to hold them as long as he liked, but ha (Mr Macalister) would submit that that was never the intention of the Legislature. The regulations provided that a sawmill license should not exceed 200 acres but the holder of a license might claim to have three additional areas, adjoining the first, set aside for him, the time allowed in which to cut being two years for each 300 acres from the date of appropriation. He thought the Land Board would take a practical view of the regulation. He did not propose to ask the Board to decide any nice quostion of law, or. to solve any difficult legal problem, but the members ought to look at the regulations in a commonhiifise way and give effect to tbo spirit of the Act. If Mr Massey relied on a technicality foe ought to be put in the position of having to substantiate his right in a Court of law. This was the view the Board should take of the matter, and if the Board took that view they would grant Mr Wallis's applications. Mr Massey's right must depend upon the fact that the :negulations contained no stipuli. tion as to how long the original area was to be held, while they limited the time allowed in which to cut out the reserves. Reckonitng the original area on the same basis, he would be allowed sixteen years from the date of appropriation in which te work out these areas. These privi- ? leges which he claimed to hold were j granted, to him by the Crown on con- j dition that he competed wiltfo cer- 1 tain conditions, and worked out these [ areas one after the other in accord- 1 ance /with the spirit cf the Act and the regulations, and if he allowed the prescribed -time to expire before taking advantage of the privileges, then the privileges must lapse. Mr Macalister went on to draw an analotrv between the privileges.held by Mr 1 Maesey and those which might "be I held over an area in which gold was I believed to exist. The gold was not the. property-of the grantee until Hhad actually extracted it, and !| fc* failed to do this within a certain time his lights were forfeited. In the same way Mr Maesey did net own the land or the timber on it, lut.he hat the right, if he complied with the Act and the regulations to remove tha: bush and make it his own. «But the J area was granted twenty years ag" ! and nothing whatever had been done j to it. The plain meaning of the Act I was that these areas reserved for the i exclusive use of the grantee must be j worked by him, but Mr Massey had not had: the areas surveyed until 1-2 | nrs later, in 1901. iCt could not be f contended that it was ever the intten- F tion of the legislature to give Mr I Massey twelve.years to say whether ? he would use them or not. It would | be difficult to convince a practical j man that this was the view that should be taikpn itn. construing the re jrulations. He submitted that tho date of appropriation was the datr when the original grant was made, and that Mr Massey had no right ?o say after 12 years whether he would take the ai*eas. If the Board were going to,administer the regulations according to theifc- spirit he thought they woiild say that the time withjr which he might do so had airpark lapsed. The mere fact that Ma- Massey had paid royalty should not affect the case ; royalty was not the price of the timber, but merely the price of tho privilege to remove it. So the mere paying of royalty dSd not make, the timber- the property of th« pwsout wfeo «*£& «li<* »«rti

'tha least degree. 9?fce only way in which the matter could be decided properly was by granting M* Wallis's; application. Otherwise where-was it.going to end f? sext yeas ha wouldbe, in no better position, end twenty years or forty years might elapse •ad still no one-would be able to apply for the timber. The plain, duty of the Board in tjh©= njatter was simply to decide it in tfois-way, and if Mr Massey thought he had a good title to these areas, it was for him to substantiate that title. Mr Massey's title was bad on other grounds . ajLso. These areas were granted originally toy 'the Commissioner of State Forests under regulations based upon, the New Zealand State Forests Act of 1885, but unfortunately tor Mr Massey these areas were not State forest, but were under the l.ax>d Act, and as such wewo, at the time tha grant was made, under the jurisdiction of the Land Board, who were therefore the only, persons who could concede any" rights in respect of them. Any license granted by any other person in authority who »vas at the time acting outside of his proper capacities, must be disregarded Xy the Board, and the Board must therd fore take up the position that no license, had ever been granted. K\ en assuming, however, that these riphts w.ere pirfoperly granted under the Act of 1885, the evident intention of that Act was that where a man made i a application for several areas, ne could be granted a license ovir only one-, and he could not receive a Hcenssfor a second until he had also received a certificate from the proper f'rown officer that all tha marketable timber in the first was.cut out. 4t the time these areas were applied for in lßj*9 there were certain regulations in for- - ce (timber regulations for the Southland District l®7B>) under which the lands could have been granted to him by the Land Board. Under these regulations Mr Massey could have been granted privileges by the Board for which he applied to fhe State Forestry Departmeat. The applications were therefore wrongly made, and illegally granted, and any license . : which, was issued .was simply void. If thdrle had been a mistake the Board would have, been quite right jto put things right for him, but the fact that foe had allowed! 20 years to elapse before altered .the position.- He; urged upon the Board the importance of the question He understood there were large areas of timber lands in. Southland, similarly, held, and looked up, and these would ; 01l be,affected ly the finding. If the Board held that Mr Wallis's 'application could not be granted, it would mean-that a gross injustice was "being perpetrated; as it was manifestly against publics;policy and public interest that lands be locked up in that way. If the Boferd decided to .grant.the applications Mr Massey had ft clear remedy: he cculd take proceedings to prohibit the Board from giving a license. There might then .be some questions of law to be argued, but the -Board should not, he thought, concern them selves with these. Meantime he asked the members to look at the surrounding circumstances, at the Act, and at the regulations, and simply to grant the application. The Beard after hearing-Mr Macalister discussed- the matter in committee, and subsequently passed a resolu tion as follows :—"That a special meetftig of the Board be .held on the 21st May for the further consideration of the matter, and that Mr Mas sey be notified, accordingly."