THE HUNDREDS REGULATIONS BILL.

Evening Star, Volume VII, Issue 1960, 17 August 1869, Page 2

THE HUNDREDS REGULATIONS BILL.

To the Editor of the Evening Mar. Sir—l have carefully read your Wellington “Occasional Correspondent’s” letter, published by you this evening. As the concluding portion of the letter is calculated to mislead those who have not carefully perused the authorised report, permit me to supplement your correspondent’s account of the proceedings connected with the passing of the Hundreds Regulations Bill through Committee. I learn from Hansard, No. 9, page 94, that it was Mr Dil on Bell who “proposed the insertion of provisions limiting the amount of compensation to be paid to runholders.” But the maximum rate of compensation proposed by Mr Dillon Bell was 3s (id per acre, and it was not Mr Macau drew, nor any other Otago representative, but Mr Wood, a Southland member, who moved an amendment reducing the proposed rate of compensation to 2s Qd per acre. Mi' Wood s amendment, though opposed by a largo majority °f Otago representatives, was carried by eight votes ; the numbers being 24 and 1G respectively. The division list shows that Messrs Cargill. Ora am, Driver, Macandrew, Main, Dillon Hell, Vogel, and O’Neill voted for the higher rate of 3a 6d, while Messrs Howorth, Mervyn, Bradshaw, and Reynolds, voted for the lower rate of 2s 6d. Messrs Birch, Burns, Haughton, and Rich seem to have been absent during the whole of the proceedings. The following new clause was next pro-

posed (by Mr Dillon Bell also I presume) - “ Maximum of compensation to be paid to runholder on surrendering lease of whole run to be 2s 6d per acre.” Mr Wood moved that Is 6d per acre be for 2s od. Again, in spite of a large majority of the Otago members, Mr Wood’s amendment m favor of the lower rate of compensation was carried, hut only by a majority of 2 ; the Otago members voting exactly as before. It may be true that the second reading of the Bill was not formally resisted, but it is quite well known that its leading and more obnoxious provisions were opposed throughout by three Ota 10 members :—Messrs Howorth, Mervyn, and Bradshaw It appears from Ifansard that two other divisions were t .ken in committee at the instance of those three gentlemen, but with results highly unfavorable to what 1 believe to be the true interests of Otago. I have reason to know that the division lists on the occasion referred to. more especially thorn relating to the amount of compensation, have been very carefully not d by many intelligent settlers throughout Otago. For very obvious reasons, no one seems to be surprised at Messrs Dillon Bell, Cargill, Graham, Main, Driver, and Vogel voting for the higher rates of compensation, f >r these gentlemen have been consistent throughout. They do not seem to have been deceived any one in this matter, and they have only acted in regard to the Hundreds Regulations Bill as might have been expected. But from Mr Macandrew other things might have been looked for. Had that gentleman even acted as Mr Reynolds seems to have done, it might be possible for him to explain away, to the satisfaction of some of bis friends, the strenuous support which he seems to have given to the general principles of the Bill; but, as it is. many of Mr Macandr.w’s most devoted adherents are said to be anxiously awaiting his account of the reasons which led him once and again to vote along with the runholding interest in support of higher rates of compensation than what were considered fair and reasonable even by a majority of the members of the Ass mbly. It is well known that Mr Birch was called away from Wellington by public duty, and it is to be hoped that Messrs Burns, Rich, and Haughton will be able to render a satisfactory account to their constituents for their absence from the Assembly during the discussion of a measure so vitally affecting the welfare of Otago. Your correspondent writes somewhat sneedngly of “ Northern Island meu deciding upon Laud and Goldfield Regulations for the Province of Otago.” But the people of Otago are, in my hurab'e opinion, under a deep debt of gratitude to Mr Wood and those members of other Provinces who, along with our own Howorth, Mervyn, Bradshaw, and Reynolds, strove to diminish, if they could not wholly avert, the injury saught to be inflicted upon this Province by means of the Hundreds Regulations Bill.—l am, &c., WioE Awake. {To the Editor of the Eoeniny Star.) Sir, —Your occasional correspondent, hailing from Wellington, has kindly consented to enlighten the Otago colonists on the provisions of this now famous Bill, and has asserted that the press has been throwing dirt on the representatives of this Province in the General Assembly, and that the Bill will enable Hundreds to be declared mors easily than formerly. He is far more confident than the hon. F. Dillon * Bell. Mr Bell could say in his letter, “hereafter it will be granted ” Your correspondent imagines that we ought not to hesitate io expressing our gratitude to our representatives in thus by their wise legislation furthering bona Jidc setll meut. I hope he will he good enough to explain how the Act does so. It is fortunate that the Act lias been published, and I think he must imagine the people lu re can allow dust, not dipt, to be tljrqwn in their eyes if they are unable, with the smallest m dicum of conu mon sense, not to understand their mother tongue and the uses to which it is usually put. As it may happen, however, that this Bill does u t limit the area of the new hundreds, does not fix that one-half shall be agricultural land, does not allow an acreage compensation, besides giving value for all improvem -uts, docs not take the power of deciding on what Hundreds shall be declared from the Provincial Council td vest it in irresponsible nominees of the General Government, in fact does not signify what the wards used in the Act imply. I wait with impatience a new edition of Walker’s Dictionary revised by your Wellington correspondent, and made suitable for the favorable construction of the Acts of the New Zealand Legisla ure. 'i ill this edition is forthcoming I fear sensible people will think that your occasional correspondent is throwing dust into the the people. —I am, &c., Common Sense.