PROVINCIAL COUNCIL

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume 13, Issue 690, 10 June 1869, Page 2

PROVINCIAL COUNCIL

TUESDAY, MAY 25, 1869. [Proceedings of this day continued from oar last.] The Council met pursuant to adjournment, at 7 p.m. THE RUSSELL GRANT. Mr Carlyon moved— That this Council do petition the General Assembly to repeal the Russell Military Grant Act, 186 S, or to take the necessary steps to procure its disallowance by the Queen; and that a select committee be appointed to prepare such petition. Such eommittee to consist of the Speaker (with his permission), Messrs Buchanan, Ferard, Locke, and the mover; and that the Superintendent be requested to present such petition and support its prayer, in his place in the House of Representatives.

- He wished to ascertain the tone of the House on this subject, as it was rather a delicate matter to pass a resolution, clashing, as this did, with the legislation of a higher body. He might, indeed, say that it v as a unique proceeding for a Provincial Council thus to criticize the acts of the General Assembly, and it behoved 'them to act with precaution in thi? case, or they would stand a good chance of being snubbed The voluminous evidence taken by the Select Committee in : his case was now on the table, but he feared that very few members had made themselves acquainted ith it, and he had observed that when he began to read it, gentlemen immediately began to leave the room. Such things as these showed the value of our Provincial institutions—in a division most members would only watch which side the Superintendent took, and would follow him like a flock of sheep. Though this record had been called for, he did not believe a singie member had read half of it; and therefore the task—by no means a pleasant one—of explaining and summarising it, was thrown upon his shoulders. The evidence showed that 400 acres had been granted by the Government to Mr William Russell Russell on the ground of his military services, and on the conation, amongst others, that he should lvside not less than four years out of the first five in the Colony. These Germs he did not fulfil, hut marched off to England thirteen day before his four years had been completed. He could not plead ignorance—the conditions of the grant were in as plain terms as the English language could convey, and he had a father and brother who had obtained land on the same terms, Even under these circumstances if he had only sought to be placed m his original position it appealed no one would have quarrelled with him ; though he (Mr C.) would under such circum stances have objected—considering that to be one second under the time was as much a violation of the regulations as one year : —but he had the cool insolence to ask for double the amount of land, which land he (Mr C.) with the evidence before him, could only say was obtained under false pretences. His proper course would have been to have come to the Council with a petition of grievances, but he he did not do this —his probability of success would have been so small. He knew that his father was a member of the highest House of Assembly in the Colony—tho Legislative Council ; ro that Assembly he applied, and with the assistance of his father the grant was obtained in this illegal and unjust manner—a manner in which no one who had not a father in the Legislative Council could obtain it. In the House of Representatives the original motion was for a small matter of 300 acres : this met with no opposition, it was simply seconded and passed unquestioned. This gave them the necessary assurance to ask ifor 800 acres. Then it came to the Legislative Council. Mark the time when it was brought forward there j—within fourteen days of the end o: the Asembly, when it was under stood that no new question* were tc be introduced, and nearly all tin members had left, leaving little mor( than a quorum to carry on the busi ne j ss. Mr M'Lean said it was introduce! • long before the end of the session. Mr Caiilyon begged his Honor'; » pardon. He admitted that it migh Ihave been six weeks before the en<

|of the session when it was broiiouH 1 into the House of BepresentatiyJH but he had been speaking 0 f jB Legislative Council. He did not LI I lieve the Superintendent had a ZB idea what the result would be *]JI he moved in the Assembly tor .1 grant of 300 acres; but the motfrj which guided his mind on this sion were beyond the capacity of 01 , dinaiy individuals. Hot being in secret he found it hard to say he was disposed to make this Ut% humble motion—a very different thing indeed, though,, from a question of 800 acres, especially when it considered that land was more scajc« and valuable then than at the tim e of the original granc. To this dq one objected, but very shortly afcerifc had quietly passed the house,—a fort. night or three weeks before the end of the session, which held on longer than was expected —the measure introduced into the Legislative Council. We now find the whole frame of the act altered in some in, sidious manner, by some person whom we might naturally suppose to be the mover in the Legislative Council. This act he did not hold the Superintendent in any way responsible foi. The preamble of theact occupied two and a half pages s three-fourths of which at least "wai ial se —i n fact it was false in representation almost from the first word to the last. Further, this act -was false in the knowledge of the parties who drew it, who he now accused of having falsified it to rob. us: of 800 acres of land. This was the first instance of anything of the kind occurring in the*General Assembly, and if the Superintendent admitted lie was cognisant of the attempt to obtain the 800 acres, he should say U was guilty of it as well. Mr Russell had never done the Province the slightest service, in fact it was rather otherwise, for he had previously vio* lated the law by leasing native land.. When we found that the grounds on which this grant was made had substantially no foundation in fact—that the evidence the committee had taken contradicted every portion of the statement, he was justified in saying that we should do our utmost to re-obtain the land of which we had been unjustly deprived. Small as the amount was, the principle involved was the same, and if we were robbed last year of 800 acres, who was to know that we should not lose 8,000 this year in the same way I As for the gentleman through whose influence principally this grant was obtained, from his position in society he (Mr C.) could hardly, had he not known it to be true, have supposed that he would have allowed his political honor to be tainted by voting for an award of land to his own son. England had before now taunted the colonies with the character of their legislators—she might well do so if tilings like this were allowed to go on. He hoped the Council would support this motion. Mr Ferard seconded the motion. There was one person whom the committee had omitted to examine, having been pressed for time, —Mr A ugust Koch. He should have been asked if he ever informed Mr Russell that only three years" residence in the Colony was required in the case of a military grant. He moved that Mr Koch should be called to answer this one question, which would place the matter beyond the possibility of doubt.

Mr Ohmond said all the evidence should have been taken by the Committee. Here it was proposed to enter into the same inconvenient I proceeding as had been tried before i with the Commissioner of Crown ,Lands. Mr Koch did not belong to 'the Crown Land-; Office, and had noauthority to make any statement. |lf he had done so it could not have ! | affected the case. He could not tor 'jthe life of him see what light ii • would throw on the matter. Mr M'Lean objected to the course * taken as exceedingly unus'ial. Alt ' the witnesses should have been eX- ' amined by the select committee. The motion having been agreed, I to, Mr Koch was called. His attention having been called to a portion , of the preamble of the Act, he wa* ■ asked by Mr Ferard, through th* I I Speaker —

T)ici you ever give the information . jtfr Russell therein recited I —No, Did you ever inform him that the Auckland Waste Lands Act, 1862, applied to this Province ?—No. Did you ever tell him that only three years' residence was required from a military settler?—l could no t have done so. j\£r A'Deajste could not allow himself to gi ye a silent vote on this subject. I n tne fr' B * pl ace > notwithstanding the assertion of the member f or Te Aute, that no member had iea d the papers on this subject, he could say that he had read every word of them, as well as the correspondence on the subject. He had been astounded when he heard that gOO acres of the estate of the P ovince had been made away to Mr ftussfcll by an Act of the General Assembly. If it was possible to alter it, it should be done; he would take his stand against it as a dangerous precedent. He always doubted the propriety of these military grants, but considered that in all the'-'e cases the provisions should be strictly enforced. A* he had said on another question, contracts were useless unless they were adhered to, and ie trusted the Council would take e*ery means in their power to upset the grant. Mr M'Lean thought ir had been admitted that Captain Russell was fairly and equitably entitled Lo 400 acres, and the highest land authority in the Colony, Mr Dome!*, was of tbe same ojunion, and was> also in doubt whether the Auckland Act did not apply. All tbe conditions had been complied with except one, the only exception was the thirteen days, to which no one would have wade any objection. The member for Te Aute had said that this Act was an exceptional one—that nothing corresponding to it had ever been passsed in the Assembly. He could draw that gentleman's attention to acts by which a much larger extent di Provincial territory than this had been ceded by the General Government to individuals, without the consent of the Provincial Councils There was the case of Mr Busby, in which £36,000 worth of land scrip and a large extent of land was conferred on him against the wish of the Superintendent and Executive of Auckland, which would show that the Assembly would not be ruled by Provincial representations, but from their own sense of justice There was the case of Major Herbert, in another Province, and of Colonel Dahieavis, who, though he did not fulfil the conditions of his grant, yet his claim was* made good. There was the case of Francis Williamson of Wanganui, to whom a grant of 5000 acres in the Province of Wellington was made, on account of damage sustained from the nathe right to fish in a stream on his land, without the Provincial Council being consulted. There was also the case of John Jones, of Dunedin, to whom tbe Provincial Government awarded 2,200 acres, which was increased to 8,500 by the General Assembly. He could bring more instances, but he thought these sufficient to prove that the General Government acted independently of Provincial Councils. He was opposed to the system of military grants, but this whs one of the few cases left outstanding, and it was with the object of preventing litigation between two settlers that he brought the subject forward in the General Assembly. His motion Vto not for 300 acres, as had been stated, but for 800, as he and his colleague considered that, there be; Uig no ten shilling land left m the Province, an equivalent in value shoi.ld be given. A member for die Town had said the affair was a shameless job. It was no job at all, out a perfectly straightforward proceeding He had been asked to use his influence to settle this question, an -d he did so, without any injustice ov unfairness to the Province. It the only course open, and jhe believed the unpopularity of Mr Russell the. only reason why this motion had been brought up. Mr Ferard felt it hard to confine toinself to proper language on this object • but neither in the evidence taken by the Committee nor the B P«ech of his Honor, did he find to alter the opinion he had

before expressed—that it was a shameless job. [Mr Carlvon. Hear, hear.] What he had to complain of was that a bill had been introduced by the Superintendent, and further supported by our other representative in the General Assembly, which practically was depriving! the Council of its right to deal with the lands of the Province. The two Houses of Assembly had in 1866 distinctly decided that they would not legislate on the subject of Waste Lands without the concurrence of the Provincial authorities. The Superintendent had adduced a number of cases, not one of which bore upon the question. He had just glanced at the act referring to the Williamson grant, and found +hat it gave power to the Superintendent and Provincial Council to make the grant, so that the Assembly did not take it upon themselves to settle the matter, but recognized the authority of the Provincial Council to decide in the matter. The Busby claim stood on a very different footing. It arose before the Provincial Councils had the management of the Waste Lands, and clearly had no bearing on this case. The John Jones act was one which the Assembly had no occasion to be proud of, but that referred to a claim, like Mr Busby's, which existed long before Provincial Councils were instituted To show the utter worthlessness of the Superintendent's statement, he need only refer to the fact that Mr William Russell Russell had received money for the land and if he had a claim, could have proved it in the Supreme Court. Yet he came to the Assembly without reason, and came with a lie in his mouth. [Mr Carlyon : Hear, hear.] The equivocation could not conceal the lie —that he Jiad made enquiries of some non-existent person. iSTo doubt it was thought that it would be difficult lo arrive at the truth in the matter; but it had been done. Capt. Carter had said that no such inquiries were made of him, and Mr Koch had stated that he never gave the information described. It was possible, however, that Captain Russell had not seen the preamble of the Act. Mr Ferard spoke at considerable length, characterizing the mea sure as a fraud on the Province.

Mr Locke thought the provincial estate should nob be disposed of; without the consent of the Council; J but could not approve of the partyspirit which had been shown in the matter.

Mr Ormond said that he now rose mainly on account of the gross language vsed by the member for the town, and he could only account for the motives he had attributed to the Superintendent and himself (Mr O.) by concluding that they were similar to those which ruled his own actions. He had used such expressions as a gross job and fraudulent transaction on the strength of statements which were entirely incorrect. If such charges had been made against him as he had just heard made against. Mr Russell, he knew what course he would have taken, and if Capt. Russell—who, they had just been told, came to the Assembly with a: lie in his mouth—did not make the honorable gentleman remember his words for many a day he was not the man he (Mr O.) took him for. And it would serve the honorable gentleman right, for no one had a right to use such insolent words,! more particularly when protected by the position in which they stood. All the session the honorable gentleman had acted the part of the; little dog—snap, snap, snap, in every direction; and at last had fastened on M r Russell. He had spoken in a most contemptible manner —a manner little to his credit He believed that in the opinion of his fellow settlers Captain Russell stood as high as the hon. gentleman. This abuse had nothing to do with the question. Mr Fekard said he had afterwards qualified his remark by saying thatvery possibly Capt. Russell had not seen the recital of the act. Mr OitMOND said the hon. gentleman had deliberately used the words he had quoted. Such language was shameful. Mr Feratid did not think it right for the member for Poranagahau to

repeat his assertion after he had distinctly stated that he had qualified the statement. He did point out that Captain Russell might not have known of all the statements in the Act. Mr Oemond was satisfied that the hon. gentleman was ashamed of his words. Mr Fekard ro ?e to order. He was nob ashamed of any expressions he had used.

Mr Ormokd : Then he ought to be —ought to be thoroughly ashamed of the personal line he had taken. The past actions of Mr M'Lean and himself were he was happy to say, too well known for the public to believe that they would lend themselves to a shameless job, and he did not thank the member for the Town for the statement. In the first place the case was referred to the representatives of the Province—the Su perintendent and himself —to settle if possible. He believed it had previously been brought up in the Council. [Mr Buchanan : Yes, but only discussed privately.] When his friend and himself arrived in Wellington, Mr Domett, the Secretary of Crown Lands, asked their advice in the matter. Under the original grant Captain Russell occupied 400 acres of Major Lambert's run, and they thought that having morally fulfilled all the conditions, he Mas entitled in equity to the land. They had several interviews with Mr Domett, and took the whole case into consideration. M.ajor Lambert was to lease the land for seven years at £ls per annum, and to pay £4OO for it at the end of the time. When Major Lambert found that Captain Russell had not fulfilled his contract with the Government by thirteen days, he at once took advantage of the omission, and applied at the Land O Sice for the land. Th e application was received and his money taken, and of course by this process he was the gainer of £2OO. Mr Domett's ideas on the subject agreed with their own, and as they were of opinion that there v-as no land left in the Province of equal value with that of which he had been deprived, they increased the grant to 800 acres, to make up the value. In the presume of work neither himself nor his colleague noticed rhe statements in the bill, and for these they were not responsible. This was the isimple history of the whole case—they had done what they considered just, and there was no job in the matter. The person who benefited was not Captain Russell, but Major Lambert, who gained £2OO by the transaction, and he was certainly no supporter of the Government. Pie could not but regret the violent and gross personal attacks which had been made in this discussion, and he felt shame to hear them. He believed it would be an absolute money benefit to Captain Russell to be put back in his original position on Colonel Lambert's run; in fact, he believed he would cheerfully make the exchange. He hoped he had fully shown that himself and his colleague, in the course they took, were actuated by no underhand motives, but had simply done their best for the interests of the Province. Mr Buchanan said that the Superintendent had been unfortunate in his attempt to find parallel cases! to the one under discussion. The claim of John Jones dated as far jback as 1830, and it had been shown that he had disbursed among the natives from whom he bought he land about £B,OOO. Neither were there any parallel circumstances in the Busby case. That was one of long-standing, before New 'Zealand was a British Colony at all, 'when Mr Busby was British consul iin Auckland. The affair was no I ere it to New Zealand, but he had now after years of worn and torment, succeeded in obtaining a large quantity of remission scrip from the Province of Auckland. He (Mr B ) remembered listening, in the year 1839, to a debate on the subject in the Sydney House of Assembly. He thought Captain Russell's fault in this case had been that he was too grasping. He did not think any one would have been over nice about 13 days; but that gentleman had over-reached himself. With the simple desire to do justice to the case accord-

ing to its merits he would move an amendment which would place the. motion in the following form— That this Council do petition the General Assembly to amend the Enssell Military Grant Act, 1868, by confining the grant to 400 acres; and that a committee be appointed by ballot to prepare such petition ; and that the Superintendent be requested to present such petition, and support its prayer in his place in the House of Representatives. —The part referring to disallowance by the Queen would thus be omitted —the Council had nothing to do with this subject. He thought the fairest plan would be to elect the Committee by ballot.

Mr Rhodes seconded the amendment. When the last speaker rose he was just on the point of bringing forward a similar amendment himself. He considered that our members being only fallible creatures, had made a mistake in their well meant endeavors to tide this affair over, and save a tedious lawsuit. Those who who were opposed to this grant might be disposed to pray to be saved from their friends, for if anything was likely to drive an independent member to the other side of the House, against his conscience and judgment, it was the intemperate language of the member for the Town. That member, with a good cause, had run into such errors of iudgment—such outrageous language —that if it were possible for him (Mr R.) to vote against his con science, he should have been driven to do so. Mr Carlyon would oppose the amendment. After some further discussion, the amendment was agreed to on a division and the following committee appointed by ballot--Messrs TifFen, Ormond, Furard, A'Deane, and Buchanan. SUPPLY. The Council went into Committee of Supply, and after some business in Committee adjourned to next sitting day.