THE NEW ZEALAND GAZETTE.
187

under the Nelson Waste Lands Act of 1858, set apart the premises mentioned as
a reserve; and it is equally certain that, during Mr. Richmond's term of office,
the Waste Lands Board did not, under the Act of 1863, "by resolution published
in the Gazette, reserve the said land" for any purpose whatsoever.

Under such circumstances, we venture to declare Mr. Richmond's act to have
been ultra vires.

It is difficult to believe that the provincial authorities of Nelson could have
relied upon the action taken by Mr. Richmond; inasmuch as on the 3rd Sep-
tember, 1866, His Honor the Superintendent, acting as the delegate of His
Excellency the Governor, by Proclamation included the so-called reserve in the
Nelson South-West Gold Fields.

Again, the same officer, by another Proclamation of the 8th June, 1868, whilst
revoking that lastly mentioned, embraced within the new limits of the gold field
inter alia the unsurveyed portion of the reserve tinted pink on the map annexed,
together with that tinted green, then subdivided into town sections, and held by
business licensees under the Gold Fields Act.

However, on the 8th February, 1872, the Nelson Waste Lands Board pro-
claimed the whole of the "so-called Colliery Reserve" a reserve for "public
utility;" and the question then arises whether, assuming that the land had not
been already dedicated by Mr. Richmond, and under the circumstances already
detailed, the Board was capable of dealing with it.

The Gold Fields Acts of this colony are numerous; many of their provisions
are incongruous and frequently incomprehensible; but, notwithstanding the
ambiguity with which section 48 of the Act of 1866 is clothed, we are of opinion
that at the period mentioned it was necessary to withdraw from a gold field land
included therein before it could be “dealt with, sold, occupied, and disposed of,"
and that the Waste Lands Board had no power to reserve, but could simply enjoy,
after reservations made, such rights in respect of the land so appropriated as their
Lands Act might confer upon them.

Upon that construction of the section referred to, we have no alternative but
to pronounce the dedication of 1872 invalid.

Taking the invalidity of the acts of Mr. Richmond and the Nelson Waste
Lands Board as our hypotheses, we are constrained to treat as irregular the Pro-
clamation of His Excellency the Governor, dated the 26th December, 1872,
which declared that the "Reserve" should cease to form part of the "Crown
lands," and therefore be no longer available for occupation as a gold field.

That Proclamation professes to be made under the 5th section of the Gold
Fields Act of 1868, and was passed upon the sole, and, as we contend, incorrect,
assumption that Mr. Richmond's act was legal: it must be restricted to that, even
if the validity of the proceedings of the Nelson Waste Lands Board in 1872 could
be conceded, inasmuch as the section under notice can, in our opinion, operate
only against land "declared set apart or applied" prior to the passing of that
Act. Whether action taken by the Governor in Council under section 10 of the
Act of 1866 would be tantamount to a withdrawal of land from a gold field, it is
unnecessary to advise: suffice it for us to express the opinion that the Proclamation
of December, 1872, was not made under, neither can it be read with, the section
mentioned.

If the argument just advanced is sound, it must follow, we apprehend, that
at the passing of "The Railways Act, 1874," the land coloured pink and green
was, to all intents, a portion of the Nelson South-West Gold Fields.

Whether "The Railways Act, 1874," and your Excellency's Proclamation of
the 19th April, 1875, read therewith, or "The Immigration and Public Works
Act, 1875," have or has removed the whole of the Reserve from the operation of
the Gold Fields Act, and has enabled the colony to deal with both parcels of land
for the purposes mentioned therein respectively, it is, we deferentially suggest,
the province of the Law Officers of the Crown to advise your Excellency. It is,
we conceive, enough for us, upon the facts elicited during the progress of this
inquiry, to inform your Excellency that the notation by the Hon. Mr. Richmond
and the acts of the Nelson Waste Lands Board in 1872 (although irregular), the
declarations and conduct of the Provincial Government and their officers, together
with that tinted green, then subdivided into town sections, and held by
business licensees under the Gold Fields Act.

However, on the 8th February, 1872, the Nelson Waste Lands Board pro-
claimed the whole of the "so-called Colliery Reserve" a reserve for "public
utility;" and the question then arises whether, assuming that the land had not
been already dedicated by Mr. Richmond, and under the circumstances already
detailed, the Board was capable of dealing with it.

The Gold Fields Acts of this colony are numerous; many of their provisions
are incongruous and frequently incomprehensible; but, notwithstanding the
ambiguity with which section 48 of the Act of 1866 is clothed, we are of opinion
that at the period mentioned it was necessary to withdraw from a gold field land
included therein before it could be “dealt with, sold, occupied, and disposed of,"
and that the Waste Lands Board had no power to reserve, but could simply enjoy,
after reservations made, such rights in respect of the land so appropriated as their
Lands Act might confer upon them.

Upon that construction of the section referred to, we have no alternative but
to pronounce the dedication of 1872 invalid.

Taking the invalidity of the acts of Mr. Richmond and the Nelson Waste
Lands Board as our hypotheses, we are constrained to treat as irregular the Pro-
clamation of His Excellency the Governor, dated the 26th December, 1872,
which declared that the "Reserve" should cease to form part of the "Crown
lands," and therefore be no longer available for occupation as a gold field.

That Proclamation professes to be made under the 5th section of the Gold
Fields Act of 1868, and was passed upon the sole, and, as we contend, incorrect,
assumption that Mr. Richmond's act was legal: it must be restricted to that, even
if the validity of the proceedings of the Nelson Waste Lands Board in 1872 could
be conceded, inasmuch as the section under notice can, in our opinion, operate
only against land "declared set apart or applied" prior to the passing of that
Act. Whether action taken by the Governor in Council under section 10 of the
Act of 1866 would be tantamount to a withdrawal of land from a gold field, it is
unnecessary to advise: suffice it for us to express the opinion that the Proclamation
of December, 1872, was not made under, neither can it be read with, the section
mentioned.

If the argument just advanced is sound, it must follow, we apprehend, that
at the passing of "The Railways Act, 1874," the land coloured pink and green
was, to all intents, a portion of the Nelson South-West Gold Fields.

Whether "The Railways Act, 1874," and your Excellency's Proclamation of
the 19th April, 1875, read therewith, or "The Immigration and Public Works
Act, 1875," have or has removed the whole of the Reserve from the operation of
the Gold Fields Act, and has enabled the colony to deal with both parcels of land
for the purposes mentioned therein respectively, it is, we deferentially suggest,
the province of the Law Officers of the Crown to advise your Excellency. It is,
we conceive, enough for us, upon the facts elicited during the progress of this
inquiry, to inform your Excellency that the notation by the Hon. Mr. Richmond
and the acts of the Nelson Waste Lands Board in 1872 (although irregular), the
declarations and conduct of the Provincial Government and their officers, together