Hawke's Bay Times. NAPIER, FRIDAY, JANUARY 8, 1864.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume III, Issue 156, 8 January 1864, Page 2

Hawke's Bay Times. NAPIER, FRIDAY, JANUARY 8, 1864.

When the Waste Lands of this island were handed over to the tender mercies of the Provincial Governments, a deadly blow was given to the vital principle of the Colony. No sooner did the small cliques of directly interested people get a chance than a general scramble took place for the best pickings of the nutritious banquet placed before them. The consequence was foreseen and foretold by those not interested in the scramble, and has now come to pass. We have now no lands.

Yet, regardless of this fatal fact, perfectly regardless of the unquestionable truth that we have no land left out of our once large heritance, it is now proposed to legalise a series of regulations which utterly 'and for ever extinguish any lingering spark of hope that might yot be found amongst us that we

should be able to take a stand amongst the Provinces of New Zealand upon a sure foundation, —that is, upon the foundation of an annual income derivable from our lands.

The present Provincial Government, taking council from the profitable working to themselves of the old Land Regulations now propose some alterations of those Regulations, which alterations are made, not with a hope that any benefit will accrue to the Province at large from those alterations, but with a strong hope that the sun of their profits may not yet be set. With this view, then, it is proposed to close up from further sale certain portions of the wretched wreck of the Provincial lands. The natural result of this proceeding is, not to give a lively impetus to the occupation and improvement of the country by men of capital either in cash or labor, but to be able to offer a feasible sort of security to the Public Creditor for certain moneys which it is proposed to get from that mysterious individual.

But we don’t stop at this point; certainly not. It is proposed to lease for a period of years the runs now held by certain persons, and as an inducement to those gentlemen to accept the lease at an improved rental, it is further proposed to give the lessee a right of pre-emptive purchase over a given area of the run thus leased. A little further on, by way of giving greater zest to this last propo> sition, it is arranged that the improvements upon the pre-emptive right land at the expiration of the term of the lease of the run shall be taken at a valuation. How extremely gratifying and tempting tip plan must appear to the parties immediately interested. The arbiter of this valuation is to be the Crown Lands Commissioner. Yes ! that officer, whose duties have long since lapsed into the great void of nothingness, is to value the improvements (sic) which . shall have been made by the lessee. How exceedingly fortunate, to be sure ! No right to appeal against the decision of this officer is reserved. No attempt is made to make it possible to object to the award of the Crown Lands Commissioner. No ! his law is as the law of the Medes and Persians —it altereth not. So that, upon the strength of the valuation put upon certain properties by a gentleman who may or may not have certain personal views of the matter (for flesh is weak—very weak indeed occasionally, and we certainly see no reason why the flesh of Commissioners should be stronger than the flesh of their less fortunate and less gifted contemporaries,) the fortunate holder of a Government lease is to rest content.

This is the culminating point of unfairness to individuals contained in the proposed alterations in the Land Regulations to which we refer. We would never allow one man, no matter who he is or what he is, to have an uncontrollable power over the affairs of his fellows. There should he, in this case — had as the case in reality is in all its bearings at least the propriety of allowing the lessee to choose his own valuer, while the Commissioner or anybody else, might act for the Government; and yet again there should be a referee. Why not take these precautions to secure fairness in the case of transactions between the Government and an individual as between two ordinary men ? However, we condemn the enth’e attempt to remodel the land regulations upon the terms proposed by Mr. Ormond. We need hardly add that w r e look upon the borrowing of money under any circumstances other than for the purpose of buying Native lands as aiming a fatal blow at what little of vitality is left in the Province.

We trust that at the forthcoming Council meeting some of the members will make strenuous opposition to this ruinous bill.