LYTTELTON COLONISTS' SOCIETY.

Lyttelton Times, Volume IV, Issue 160, 28 January 1854, Page 6

LYTTELTON COLONISTS' SOCIETY.

At the meeting of ibis Society held on Wednesday evening last, on the motion of Mi". Beeby, power was given to the Library Comlniltee to frame bye-laws for the governance of

■ the Library, subject only to the concurrence of the General Committee of the Society. Mr. Alport then brought forward the proposition advertised in-our paper of last week: " That it is highly desirable to introduce the Government Land Regulations within the Canterbury block, with the view of rendering the price of laud in this settlement conformable to that of the other settlements of New ; and that a Memorial, to her signed by 'the Inhabitants of Lyttelton, be forwarded to the General Government to effect such object." Mr. Alport commenced his observations by stating.that owing to the want of funds for carrying on public works, and for the purposes of 'immigration, &c, the settlement had come to a '•'dead lock," nov did he see any hope for the future unless some alteration was immediately made in the price of the waste lands. In consequence of the price of land here, it was within Ins knowledge that some immigrants Avho had proposed settling at Canterbury* had gone to Wellington and other provinces. He then contrasted the sale of land at Canterbury with that at Wellington and Nelson, where the Government regulations had been introduced, stating that in the Wanganui district alone 10,000 acres had been sold. Speaking of revenue, he stated, that while surpluses were to be expended at Wellington and elsewhere in the I repairs and making of roads, and for other purposes, the revenue here was not more than suf- ' iicient to pay the salaries of the different officers, these salaries being estimated at very \ moderate sums. He saw no reason why the price ; of hind in the block should be £3 an ac»e, and | outside 10s. At present, Canterbury was looked t -apon in the other colonies as a'close borough.' If \ the price of land at Canterbury were assimilated I to that of Wellington, Nelson, and Auckland, % plenty of purchasers would be found, and we 5| should have money for our public works. Mr. % Alport then read extracts from the Sydney J|, papers eulogistic of Governor Grey's scheme *| ior reducing the price of the waste lands, and /| concluded by moving the proposition given Mr. Thompson seconded the proposition. Mr. C. 0. Bowen said that he must object to 'il the resolution of Mr. Alport on other grounds '\ than on the question of th&price of land: viz. 1 That it pledged those who'should vote for it to * absent to the legality of the Governor's Regu*l hitions. He thought Mr. Alport did not un- |, dcrstand that two separate questions were in- \ iol\ed in his resolution. That the price of '{ land was a subject very open to discussion, but $ that even were he disposed to advocate a cheap f yS price of land, he would not vote for such a resolution as that of Mr. Alport. We have the | opinion of the highest legal authority in New |! Zealand, (the Supreme Court,) as to the illegal- | ity of His Excellency's proclamation. I Dr. Donald said, he trusted so very objectionI able a resolution as that just proposed, would I not be adopted ; the question of the price of | land was not the only matter involved in it. I The resolution would pledge the Society to an | advocacy of the whole scheme ;an irresponsible I commissioner, the low fixed price, and several | most oppressive clauses, besides assenting to a ; most unconstitutional proceeding, even assum- ; ing it to be technically legal. The Constitu- ; tional Act placed this matter in the hands of the \ General Assembly. TheelectorsofCanterburyhad ; made their choice of members to that body, and although not yet called together, it was an ■ existing parliament. He deprecated any universal system for New Zealand, onsidering that the peculiar circumstances of each settle- • ment required special arrangements, and proposed the following amendment: — ]' " That it is the opinion of this Society that \ the question of the administration and price of the waste lands at present belongs to the Ge- \ neral Assembly ; and that a petition be present;ed to that body, praying the transfer of such \ power to the Provincial Council." I His Honor the Superintendent, who atten- | dec! as a member of the Society, suggested to [ Mr. Alport, the dividing of his proposition, in \ order that the abstract question of the price of [ land might be discussed without reference to \ the Governor's proclamation. This Mr. AlI port declined to do. ; Mr. Thompson (in speaking against the \ amendment) remarked, that we wanted funds | ior making of roads, for immigration, &c, and -' las the waste lands were the only source from I whence money could be obtained, these lands had I better be disposed of at once. And as the i General Assembly, although the members had '

been elected, in consequence of the Governor's refusal to cull that body together, was a power only in posse : the best course was to apply to the governor, the power in esse, or his locum tcnens, and request him to introduce the government regulations into the Canterbury block. Mr. Sewkt.l objected to Mr. Alpovt's Resolution,as pledging the meetingabsolutely to approve the introduction of the Government land regulations. Independently of all questions about the legality,the effect would be to throw away much of the lands of the settlement upon scrip-holders, who he knew would be ready to take up lands in this settlement when the opportunity offered.That would be throwing away the best land for mere worthless paper. Besides this, the effect would be to throw away lands of which the value is not yet ascertained for nominal prices. He referred in particular to the Coal-fields. He instanced within his own knowledge, (shewing the impolicy of the Land Regulations,) that outside the block 2,000 acres of land havebeen picked out by a stockowner at 10s. an acre, the selection of which had spoiled about 20,000, by creating a monopoly of all the wood. Mr. Davis attacked the Provincial Council, remarking, that as at present constituted the question if left in their hands, woul'.l be in abeyance for years ; particularly reflecting upon the absence of the members fovsLyttelton from the meeting. Great stress was laid by him upon the fact of the neighbouring settlement, of Nelson having proposed a land tax, suggesting the same course to be pursued in Canterbury. The dread of cc territorial lords" he considered a bugbear, and instanced the case of Mr. Tollemache, who, by underletting portions of his land for tillage, &c, had enabled men of moderate capital to settle on the land In the course of his remarks, he drew a pathetic picture o<" grass growing in the streets of a deserted harbour, which the inhabitants were leaving in crowds for the neighbouring settlements (statements received with emphatic denial and much laughter). He concluded by proposing-, as a further amendment, that a general meeting of the inhabitants of Lyttelton should be called on this question, and that the discussion in the Society should be adjourned. The Chairman decided against this amendment being put to the meeting, as he considered the discussion fairly within the rules of the Society, and that the members were quite competent to form an opinion on the subject. Major Hornbrook desired an alteration in the terms of purchase of the waste lands of the block, but demurred to the Government regulations ; some portions of land in the block being worth considerably more than. 10s. per acre. He would rather have a committee appointed deliberately to consider the question and to report to the Society. He decidedly objected to a public meeting, being convinced that the subject of the waste lands could not receive a calm and dispassionate discussion at such a place. His Honor then requested permission to address a few words to the Assembly on the abstract question of dear or cheap land, and the effect each had particularly on the labouring classes. We are not able to give a correct report of his Honor's speech this week, which is a matter of regret, as it made considerable impression, but we hope to do so in our next. He affirmed that the question of cheap land was not for the poor man but for the capitalist. In reference to Mr. Davis's attack upon the Provincial Council, he mentioned, that this subject had not been overlooked by them, but that the members had agreed that it would be a mere waste of time to debate a matter not at present under their management. He also denied the statement that crowds were leaving this settlement, instancing as his authority, the harbour master's official report, which gave the number emigrating from this settlement for the last three months, as nil. In the course of his remarks, he alluded also to a scheme under consideration for leasing the lands at a low rent, with a clause attached, giving the holders a right to purchase any time during the lease at a fixed price. The Chairman, (J. Spowers, Esq.) confirmed the statements of His Honor respecting the emigration from this Settlement, as on investigation he had never found that at any time the numbers leaving were as great as stated. Mr. Alpokt having replied, the Chairman put the amendment, which was carried by a majority of (5; 10 voting for, and 10 against: munbeis abstaining from voting. i\Jr. Alport's proposition was therefore lost.

To the Editor of the Lyitelton Times. Sir, —The public are indebted to you for permitting your columns to be used for the discussion of the question of " Cattle Trespass." There is no question which so iuimedintelv concerns the interests of the community or upon which Legislation is so much needed. I have heard the Local Legislature commended for their " Scab and CatarrhjOrdinance ." they found a serious and growing evil, and they determined upon removing it. A very strinI gent and comprehensive law was necessary, and they passed such a law.. If they take up the "Cattle Trespass" question in the same spirit, an equally efficient measure may be looked for. It is truly astonishing to find men ready, like 'yourcorrespondent " A Land and Cattle Owner," to defend a law which under any circumstances confers upon one man the privilege of invading and destroying the 'property-of another. He may not go into his neighbour's corn-field to " steal, take, and cany away" &c, this would be felony, but he may send certain Agents : to wit, Horses, Cattle and the like, to destroy it quite as effectually : this is what the law authorizes. But we are told that such a state of things is perfectly reasonable, equitable, just as it should be. Cattle must be allowed the unrestricted" range of the country ; it is nonsense to talk about tending them by day and shutting them up at night. Every owner of a few cows would be ruined, if he were put to such expense and trouble, and the inevitable result would be, the entire cutting off from Christchurch their present supply of milk ; a thing not to be thought of. Horses cannot be kept in a stable, it would be sinful to waste food upon them which costs their owners money, when they might be so plentifully fed on the " Town Reserves " and the surrounding country. It is quite true that on the Downs, where there^are no fences, one'person grows corn and another at the same tinie feeds sheep, and the latter is expected to keep his sheep on his own land, and is responible, absolutely and without any qualification as to fencing, for the damages which they may do to his neighbour. But the Wiltshire downs are in England ; we cannot be expected to do what people do there ;we are in a " Colony," and cannot conform to English usage, or be guided and governed by English law. One of the first principles of the Euglisb. law, is, that every man is entitled to the undisturbed possession arid enjoyment of that which belongs to him, but it, is not at all necessaiy to recognise that principle here. Moreover, it is well known that pasturage is vastly improved by use;|ibe owners and occupiers of untilled land, so far flora sustaining injury, are positively benefitted by what their neighbours are doing for them, and the agriculturist should be thankful that he is compelled to improve the value of his land by enclosing it with a "sufficient fence." These are some of the reasons (!) which are [ given to justify the existing state of things. ! I was told a few days since by the owner of j about 20 acres of corn, that he had been up nearly the whole [of every might during the previous week, watching his crops, and he expected to be obliged to give them the same atI ten lion for the next three weeks. A herd of 10 or 12 cattle regularly came down from Christchurch, and remained all night near his ground, waiting for an opportunity to walk on to it. He had not a "sufficient" fence. I will not ask whether it. is either reasonable or equitable that this man should be compelled to take this trouble, which the owner of the cattle, the author of the nuisance, is not called upon to shave in any way, is not expected to put his cattle in a yard, nor to concern himself at all in the matter. Here is an instance, one of many which might be adduced, in illustration of the working of the law under which we live. It is simply ridiculous to attempt to shmv that the '• Cattle Trespass Ordinance is an equitable one, and that it secures [» the tiller of the soil, the protection to which he is er.tuien. He will be fairly dealt with when the damages ! which are dune by his neighbours' cattle ;<ro I assessed only with reference to the actual !•.>.-> I sustained, and without regard to the rhar;\e:er of his fences. When an Ordinance is passed hy the Local Legislature, providing lor itiis: then and not till then may he hope ior '■ ja^u1 ;• >>n the premises." I am, Sir, Your obedient Sena-H, O. Christehure'.i, l.v , 25, !Soi..