THE Bay of Plenty Times. "THE SPIRIT OF THE TIMES SHALL TEACH ME SPEED.” KING JOHN, ACT IV. Wednesday, October 27, 1875.

Bay of Plenty Times, Volume IV, Issue 327, 27 October 1875, Page 2

THE Bay of Plenty Times. "THE SPIRIT OF THE TIMES SHALL TEACH ME SPEED.” KING JOHN, ACT IV. Wednesday, October 27, 1875.

The Native Land Purchase Department has had a roughish time of it tills session; it Ims been made tlio subject of motions and speeches; it has been made the Stem post of a DroraonaN on ■which tlie Oliver Proudfoot’s of the House have exercised their swordsman’s skill; it has been the object of hints and insinuations without end. and it has boon committed to any extent. Let us see what is the outcome of all this : Wo have before us Mr Waterhouse’s speech of the 30th September, tiro 'report of tho Tairua Committee, and an abstract of the debate, or at least dialogue, on Sir George Grey’s motion on the Bth instant. Mr Waterhouse’s motion was: ‘'‘'That, in the opinion of the Council, the acknowledgment bv the Government in the purchase of native lands, of rights or leases acquired by Europeans from native owners, in violation of the laws of the Colony, is opposed to all sound principles of public policy.” He based his argument on the 75th clause of the Native Lands Act, 1865, which states that any conveyance, &c., for land not passed through the Native Lands Court is to be void ; and, while taking but little notice of the Act of IBTp which repeals that of 1865, he entrenched himself behind the statute and blazed away at the Government for having recognised the rights of the mill owners at the Thames. From published reports, it appears that in 1872, Mr Mackay sent in to tho Government a statement of the Hauraki lands, and in this he mentioned that there were timber rights held by certain companies, some by leases under certificates of title,, some- by bona, fide, but not legally

valid, agreements made prior to « issim of certificates, and these Simula be respected. unoud, who was then Minisu, Public Works, approved 0 { ' Mackay’s suggestion, and this * endorsed by the then ♦Superintend/ 1 Mr Gillies, who was aware of all? facts of the case, The land w&W I cordingly bought for the j but wbero parties had made equitM' | arrangements with the timber, these were held to be good* j allowed. In May, this year y George Grey mooted the‘ q U ’ s Cj that such agreements should not" l considered, and that where leases agreements mu legally valid had b£! made, they should be set aside ap | some compensation granted * m Waterhouse s speech was someirh»t to the same effect, except that £ pointed to actual transactions, and not, like «r George Grey,' ; himself to insinuations and hints. lb took the case of Mr Bussell, who |! i averted, had been unlawfully ££ milted by tin:- Government Agent Hr Mackay, to etain posses on of timber on some 9.000 acres. On 1 mg to Parliamentary papers c, q we iiud that this timber was bough in 1809, and that a sum of £o,ooo was given for it; the l a £ subsequently passed the Laud Court and the old agreement being ronewef became perfectly valid, and so t£ case came dearly under the authority given by the Government in pqj and which, in despite of the resolution of the Council, we affirm to havo been dictated by sound and wis-> policy. Mr Waterhouse forgot that it has been a constant custom with land brokers to drive a coach andsii through the Act of 1865. and that the very clause meant to restrain then proved, throughout, inoperative. The natives were anxious to obtain money for their lands or timber, and get advances made on them until endt time as the lands had passed the' Court, when the agreements would bs ratified ; indeed, we have not heard of any one ease of repudiation on the part of native owners—a good proof of the usual bona tides of the transactions. In this particular Thames case, the infraction of the law had led to good results: tin* natives had been well paid, and a. healthy limber Irak had sprung up. giving employment to 078 men and 27 vessels with *B2 men, Had the Government not respected these mill owners’ rights, it weu ld have been obliged to ask the Houv; to grant compensation, and a large amount would have been required for ■ this. Again, the prow of the land would have been largely increased, and the object attained would have been to hand over to the Provincial Government most valuable forests, to bo thrown open to any wood-cutter with a timber license. We can realise what would have been the advantage reaped by' the Province, when we find that during fifteen years— lß6o to 1875—the timber license fees in Coromandel and lluuraki eamo to £192 10s. In the interests then oftk Province and the general public, if wa» a wise and provident act on the part of the Government to recognise the claims of the Sawing Companies. Loth Sir George Grey and Sir Waterhouse failed to see this. They argued that the mill owners were making money, and jumped at the conclusion that if they were thrown over, tin country' ■would, in some mysterious way, be beneliited to the sumo amount: whereas, in fact, the reverse is thf truth. Had the Government ignored the transactions a greatir expenditure of Government money would have been requisite; a large body of men. ■would have been thrown out ot employment, and a useful and healthy trade absolutely stilled. It may to asked why the land was bought at all by the Government, as the timber os’* it wars disposed of; it being a patent fact that kauri land is of no goodfe| agricultural purposes. The answers simple; they were, and are still believed to bo auriferous, and the Government agreeing with the Prods-, cial authorities in misliking the native agreement by which the Thames » worked, was anxious that the rest of the country should become Crop property, so as to obviate any natm difficulties in the event of future discoveries. In accordance with this th* lands were bought: and it has he® left to a statesman like Sir George * Grey to publicly proclaim to world how far inferior is his shod' sighted cheese-paring policy to t® broad views of the General Gocerfi* ment, backed up as those wero yl their political opponent, the Supepf tendent of Auckland at that tioie, Gillies.

The reign of committees is now end, and groat must be the jubilate of members, who, weary after till two or three o’clock in the 21° ing, have had to attend their $ mittees at 11 a.m., and dose p« el _ presidency of such a one as Sir 8 Grey; and it seems as if each c

iiiittco 1 1 ail boon anxious to outdo tin? other in sonio son.-at tonal way. 'lhero was first the Ohinemun Minors’ Kiu'hts. a nasty thing altogether, but ono which was made too much of in ordor possibly to apply a salvo to virtuous minds. r iimn the Public Accounts Committee was not to bo beaten, so they got Mr 1 badges brought up to the bar of the House, created a frightful excitement, raised no end of scandal and did the Bank of Now Zealand a v i t uuoimt of good. Next in mu i v. got the report of the r i nra i ( i i.-miuee, the vaguest thing wt 1 m ' i tor a long time, and one upi a mlu I we hardly like to pronoui i h an t pimun seeing that we have not I a n us the whole of the evidence idlm I It, .however, is most unsatisfactory in its character; it neither accuses nor absolves ; it leaves a sort of undefined idea in one’s mind tliat evorv one concerned in it is bad. But, if the Committee thought so, why did it not point out at onciythe individuals it condemned ; and if it did not, why did it by insinuation implicate the persons concerned ? Besides which the report appears incomplete. Wo have heard that besides the Tairua t iT da i/hcrmW c m—-g 1 — 1 pur t h i * iuu bioa n htupl < i n it "Why is them Midi n uit notii ul Urr, to th M Cb t that tl • u\idt nit w is (ou-t’u-un-, Oi i mst ill cud iic a a nu uuntldn r tml \ h it i the ir , lUoimimf vt Hu lit ust 1 I w() tmh I matUi is brought ii it dues nU bilt tint t\ idt u t a ■j up b t it i t l ill loi U it 11 t 111 ll- * a vadu f Cl it tho I u U 1 1 niljilting' ili Muu (oiuiiuliusLo* Itngtd TO tin Hous (t Jupi Cat lti\ and iuiu s itioual uu übhu b h in all ton i u in i 1 i 1 d iimiimd will tue UgiSltUw U until I [I u Hum ill itid to bimg U actuxl a , us ilior of dm it i b unst two ot mir most u spi i mbit Amkl ind a i n Ihe nhilUmiUi f iso lint oi the i i u 1, Mr Fudgi ’ m dual n pi'o Uturo tin infiMebupt tb it um uf ih. Inst steps taken by ''he new lloush will bo to amend its mbs riumitteoa. By whit in d Um 11 a case whore two b nth imu m uithout having had tho h Rt i pponumh of saying a word i n tlu msi lu ut i uully brought in guilty of a most heinous crime. Before going into tho question of the power given to committees, we may slate wlmfc iu> know as to the matter m qm turn Everyone in and about 1 uu in, i knows something of the old lb iko I md il nms, heard before Domini smiui BCI # (tho present Speaker) in 1860, ibis case was one of them. There is no doubt it was a shady transaction in tho outset; the landwas surveyed by moonlight, and it mav possibly be due to the scanty luminosity'' thus afforded that the snrHV'i nimtook nouh for south, and hewed on hr map the required land lS 1, mg on OUC s u h of the river when it lumld haw bi ui < n the other. Be th d i s it m t\ tin 1 md seems to have iHutudU I ISS( d into Brown and ( uu q] u s I nil W Jui uliul thems h *, 01 h) tlu u n p i Ul m ul m ill m h! t mil WI ill ul* H 1 till du.l il I ti m Oil ill omit of whuh tm u g md iitnu is lu w mipiu ud C ohm ud R U lM ih ill) 1 o n mi i uphill md Ml M i V l\U would mu I l h I\o L H.pi d m Muh a di 111 mmi ibie anion jus is On b did to 11 mi w M ill I il 0 leu Tint 1 th 0 th i him ui imo tlu \ ]i 1 1 d m o 1 i th it i Ut Wit w t tl f imus whuh oi p ht to li im bui - j a a d ' bnuuhl tlu v not haoli id ut puituiuU ol defending themi\ li uppi us to ns a most mu i nous th u b th it men can, without bmip di .wo 1 t > SIN I w ud m th u owniiAoui Ip b imlul in md w idt ibtlus ulh uu lib n i bt Ii md, is wo hIM ,ood icu oil to Ik hem?, Olluis Imo also VowitohiM URW and i limit withumg St u (hauler 1 f til Imbed imorig us * Pailmm at ay 1 11\ ilege in i\ V J mu ,;ulthmp int it iti B i\umbd too far. Leavh umittii out id the question for tn. pusmt. will allude to the privilege attached to members speaking in their place in the House. It is not so long ago that a member actually by name brought a series oi accusations against numerous persons outside the House, some of thorn civil servants. What remedy have they ?_ They cannot write to the papers; it is no use their inditing epistles of wrath to the Government; and they are debarred, possibly by distance, from the enjoyment of punching the honorable member’s head. Tho accusation is circulated, and no one sees the denial, or at all events it comes too late to be of effect. And so, as there appears to have been during this session a series of attacks made in the House on the characters of men deprived of the power to defend themselves, so it seems as if committees bad also decided that they did not care one bit for the accused or implicated persons, but would simply give a verdict according to the evidence before them without giving the least chance of rebutting evidence, or even

uf a defence being brought forward. These are not the ways of tho House of Commons at home ; and if wo are to preserve our Constitutional Government let us have our Parliamentary Courts framed and carried on in tho same open, free, and just spirit as they are in the old country. Wo throw this out as a Hint to IS in George Grey, in the hope tliat as lie is devoted to tho liberties of Her Majesty’s subjects as a whole he will not think it unbeseeming to look after the liberties, rights, and privileges of individuals.