The Evening Star FRIDAY, JANUARY 26, 1872.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2790, 26 January 1872, Page 2

The Evening Star FRIDAY, JANUARY 26, 1872.

The extracts from the evidence taken by the Committee of the Legislative Council, show that the Waste Land Board, in terms of Mr Cutten’s telegram, closed with Mr Clarke’s offer. He would not flinch : he offered to buy what suited his purpose : the Government were in a corner ; they must have money, and so, although they did not like the terms, the bargain was struck. So far all was fair. Whether it was a wise sale or not, has nothing now to do with the question. The Board sold the land on behalf of the Province, and in honor, morality, and justice the Province is bound by the contract of its agents, and should insist upon its being fulfilled. Any merchant would have to abide by the act of his accredited agent, and the Board is the accredited- agent of the Province for the disposal of its waste lands. They agreed to Mr Clarke’s terms, and’Accepted his deposit as security that they would be fulfilled on his part. Had there been no condemnation of the sale by the Press, or the people, or the Legislature, not a word would ever have been heard about il more. The survey would have been made,||the money accepted, and the Crown grant issued. The Ministry would have been helped out of their difficulties, and the people never the wiser. But fate ordained otherwise. As the sale was contrary to the land theories of the parties in power, not only their political opponents, but their political supporters, charge them with inconsistency 7 . They must have been prepared for this. In fact, they tried to fortify their position beforehand by having a resolution of the Council to fall back upon. This would have been necessary to justify even a non-political Board in selling so large a quantity of land in a single block. But the whole jumble of the affair has been caused by the 9 ((«s (-political character of the Waste Land Board. Of the members of the Board, three out of five are members of the Provincial Council. Two were in Dunedin, direct parties to the contract. The Chief Commissioner and the third were in Wellington, But between the arrangement of the terms of sale and the completion of the survey, they returned to Dunedin ; an agitation was got up in the district, and from what passed on their return at the Board meetings—from which Mr Gotten, we have no doubt *Wmveb hnnnvu.blo motives absented himself—we do not think we do any 7 one injustice in saying they were mainly instrumental in placing the Waste Land Board in its present disgraceful dilemma. And what is now the difference between the Board and Mr Clarke 1 It is not a question of area : the Board is quite willing to concede that he is entitled to the quantity purchased. It is not a difference of price ; not the slightest attempt has been made to dispute that. It is simply this—as far as we can understand the matter from the documentary evidence before us, and without knowing, '■ anything beyond—that the Board claims the right to substitute about 1,900 acres, more or less, of laud, for that which Mr Clarke made an essential conditionof his contract to be allowed to purchase. Either he would have that or he would not buy. The Board agreed and lie did buy : and now 1 they say You shall have 1,900 acres “ somewhere else, and pay the money 7 , “ or your deposit shall be forfeited,” We cannot imagine that such an act of unjustifiable tyranny could by any possiblity be sustained in any court of law in the world. If there has been one such transaction previously, iu which the humblest individual in Otago has been so treated, we trust we may be excused not having called public attention to it, on the ground that, believing it to have been impossible, we have not made ourselves acquainted with the circumstances. If it be told

us that such Ims been done, we i eel condemned of neglect of duty in not watching move closely the proceedings of a Board capable of such an act of repudiation of a specific contract. It is idle to say that the sale was illegal. Common sense, common honesty, and the resolution of the Provincial Council, required that inquiry should be made into that before the bargain was made. It is equally idle to affirm it prejudicial to the public interests. Common sense, common honesty, and the resolution of the Provincial Council required that that too should be ascertained before the bargain was made, What security has anyone in dealing with a person who, after having sold goods, says — H True, I “ have sold you one lot of goods, but it “ does not suit me to deliver them—- “ you must take another lot ” ? Or what security lias a buyer in dealing with one partner in a firm, if two others come and say, “ My partner or “ partners made a bad bargain with “ you—we won’t ratify it ” 1 The fact

is that such a precedent strikes at the root of all faith in the Waste Land Board. No one knows what he is doing in dealing with them. Should the position they assume be pronounced legal, every arrangement must be onesided. No buyer can bo allowed any choice in what he does : they assume to engage to do one thing, and, having received security from the other side, they claim to have the privilege of doing another. They can fulfil or break their engagements at will, refuse to sell without a deposit, and declare the deposit forfeited if the terms they dictate, are not complied with. Such large powers as they are entrusted with, were intended to guard the Province against fraud, and to give the Board an easy remedy if it were attempted. It was never intended that they should be made the means of defrauding, annoying, or oppressing others. Yet to such an end it is plain they may be prostituted if the proceedings of the Board in this Clarke Contract are held justi--1 liable. This is not a political question —if by that term is to be understood a something arising out of a peculiar theory, entertained only by a section of the community. It is purely a question of administration, and therefore affects every one, no matter what he believes. No matter what a man’s land theory may be, he must bow to the existing laws, and his interest is to have administrators of them uninfluenced by the politics of the Government of the day. The Waste Land Board was intended to be as impartial as the judges : to know no party, and to be of no party. It was intended to be uninfluenced by those motives which sway the minds of men seeking popular favor. The hustings should have no terror to its members, and its decisions should be altogether apart from the question of how one or another will vote in view of them, or how one or another has voted in times past. On a calm consideration of the whole affair, we do not believe there is an impartial thinker who will conclude otherwise than that the vacillation shewn has been solely owing to political considerations; and this brings us to point out what is urgently needed, A thorough reconstruction of the Board.