1
40
user of the water, although the construction of a reservoir
was expressly contemplated by clause 9 of the conditions
of sale. After all it must not be forgotten that some
person other than the Company might have bought the land,
& under such circumstances the Government would have had
no right, either morally or legally, to limit the user of
the water. agree that the possibility of a purchaser
other than the Company was remote. But the possibility
was there, & I merely mention it as emphasising the
necessity for the insertion of a condition limiting the
use of the water, should such limitation have been intended,
as part of the bargain between the Government and a pur-
chaser.
It is also to be noted that the supplemental deed
expressly grants the water rights to the Company or its "assigne". Suppose, therefore, the Company sold the
reservoir it might be to a Company formed for the
purpose of selling water how could it be contended that the purchaser's rights would be in any way limited except
as expressly provided in the lease or deed.
-
In my opinion any attempt to attach to the lease or deed a condition limiting the user of the water must fail as offending the rule that written documents cannot be
varied by extrinsic evidence.
For the moment leaving out of considerating the pipe
line, I am of opinion that the Company may sell the water
to whom & as it deems fit. The Company has been granted
the right of impounding the water in a certain area, & the
water there by becomes the property of the Company, subject
only to the right of the representatives or assigns of the
late Sir Paul Chater to a supply of fifty thousand gallons
a day.
2.