THE NELSON EXAMINER. Nelson, June 3, 1843,

Nelson Examiner and New Zealand Chronicle, Volume II, Issue 65, 3 June 1843, Page 258

THE NELSON EXAMINER. Nelson, June 3, 1843,

Lea'journtux deviennent pliu n^ceaturei & meiure que ' lei hotames «ont plus fegaux, et 1' indiridualiime plat k * cnindre. Cc *enut diminuer leur importance que de croire qa' ill ne «ervent qa' Si guantir U liberty : Ui maintiennent U civilisation. Dk TocavkviLLß. De la Democratic en Amerique, tome 4, p. 290. Journals become more neceaiary a» men become more equal, and individualism more to be feared. It would be to underrate their importance to suppose that they serve only to secure liberty : they maintain civilization. Dk TocauiTiLLK. Of Democracy in America, toI . 4, p. 303. We have for some time contemplated laying before our readers a detailed statement and review of the arrangements and correspondence between the British GovernmenTand the New Zealand Company, with regard to land to be granted to the latter in these islands, so as, if possible~,~to assist them in arriving at something approaching to a clear, view of the present state of the " titles " question, aqd of the relations exist-

&ng Jbesw;e.en the four "p'arties-^-the Government, the Company, tlie in the Company's settlemfents," and the natives — as to the settlement of thexpiestion of title and possession, at present practically at issue, in several places, between the two last parties. We have intended something of this sort, and have been prevented hitherto in great part by our unwillingness unnecessarily to stir up a matter which is, very possibly, by this time, settled in England satisfactorily, and of the nature of which settlement the very next mail may inform us, andjhus

render all previous agitation of the subjact on our part futile ; but we are now forced* to break silence by an article in the Colonist of the 19th May last, which, in a tone as impolitic as it is unjust, accuses the Company of having deceived the settlers of the first settlement, by telling them " that they had acquired land which they could sell," "and, relying Upon. this statement, tens .of thousands was paid them for the possession of this land." The remarks of the^Colonist are called forth by a letter from a Wanganui settler, complaining of the hardship of being kept out of occupation by the opposition of the Maories. We should be unwilling now (it is late when we write) to attempt what we could not complete in a manner satisfactory to ourselves, viz., a full investigation of the question upon whom' the onus lies to give and secure possession to the settlers ; but we venture to assert, knowing that we can support our assertion, that, in the tone of the remarks which we quote, there is not only bad policy and injustice, but ingratitude :—: —

" This is especially a case which affects the Directors of the New Zealand Company intheir personal capacity. They have but the sanction of their names, their station, and their character, to representations which have proved delusion. They haye — unintentionally, no doubt— involved numbers in an undertaking which has proved ruinous, only because the Company has failed to perform its part. We accuse them of no delusion with regard to New Zealand. Mistakes there were among the statements they promulgated : but these were me-: vitable. The soil, the climate, the natural advantages of the country satisfy, and often even exceed, our reasonable anticipations. But in that part of the statements of the Company for which the Directors were particularly responsible — in which ignorance was culpable, and deceit disgraceful — there has been a grevions and bitter disappointment. The Company professed to possess land, and to have the means of transferring that possession to the settlers. We neither anticipated, nor asked, for a title which should be valid as against the Government. The risk of being deprived of land actually possessed under such circumstances, was not one to alarm persons , who knew anything of the principles or practice of Government. Such, however, as the risk was, we were prepared to encounter it. Upon this head we require no guarantee. But we did expect, and we have a right to demand, possession under a title which the natives themselves will reedgni*. j We expected this, because such as Lord Durham, Francis Baring, Sir William Molesworth, and the original Directors of the New Zealand Company, told us that they had acquired land which they could sell. And, relying upon their statements, tens of thousands was paid to them for the possession of this land. We now ask for a fulfilment of their part of the bargain — and are told — the natives ask too much ; if we pay what is necessary to put you in possession, we shall get no profit out of you. Incredible as it may seem, this is in truth the substance of the reasons which are alleged. And the settlers are exposed to ruin because the gentlemen to whose word they trusted cannot keep their promises and the settlers' money at the same time !

" It is difficult to restrain the indignation which this view of the subject necessarily excites. Fortunately, however, it is sufficient to state the simple facts to expose the transaction in its true light. The settlers ask possession — and the New Zealand Company, in the face of its pledges, refuses to procure for them this possession, because they cannot afford it. They could not, in such case, perhaps, have paid their £10 per cent, dividend — and they had only to choose between that and maintaining inviolate their character for veracity and integrity."

The Colonist does not belong to a single proprietor, but to several shareholders, residents, we believe, in the settlement. Surely, it cannot, in this matter, express the opinion of any number of the settlers. Here we have a total forgetfulness of the liberality throughout displayed by the Company in its dealings with Port Nicholson. "When the' Colonist speaks of the " tens of thousands," does it happen to remember what portion of these tens of thousands has been expended on the first settlement by the Company? Can it tell which way the balance is ? We suspect that a correct statement would show the settlement indebted to the Company. It is not possible to believe that the Wellington settlers have made up their minds that they have got all

they can out of ; the Company, and that now they will turn round and curry favour -in another quarter, wljere they fancy more is to be got by throwing blame upon their quondam supporters and friends for an evil which is in no view to be laid at their door, but at that of quite other parties. We do not suspect them of this ingratitude-. It is well known that several of the Directors of the N,ew Zealand Company are not, in the. nature of things cannot, be swayed by motives of pecuniary advantage in their dealings with their settlements. An interest in ,the colony of quite a different sort is that which has induced them to give up their time and exercise their influence to secure every possible advantage to those who emigrated under their auspices. We do not so strongly as we might, because we would not offensively, express our opinion of the injustice done by these accusations. W,e*, think we remember to have seen certain statements of communications between Sir George Gipps on the one hand and Dr. Evans, Mr. Moreing, and Mr. R.~ JX Hanson (as a, deputation appointed by the : settlers at Port Nicholson), on the other hand, in October and September, 1840 ; by which it would appear that the deputies, while differing with his Excellency as to the view which it appeared good to him "to take of the result as to blanks and prizes to be expected by purchasers of rights of selection of land when the priority was decided by a lottery, yet stated that " should such be the case," that is to say, should Government decide to oblige tbe "settlers to take their 110,000 acres in' one continuous block, and so enforce the selection for the later choices of nothing but tops of hills, " they anticipated that the settlers at Port Nicholson would agree to such a modification of the plan of the New Zealand Company as would give to every holder of a land-order a share of the available land within the district." Then, at least, the settlers appeared perfectly aware of the terms on which they had purchased their land, that they were rowing in the same boat with the Company, and that any interference with the title of the Company was an interference with their title, and to be acquiesced in or objected to, not by communication or remonstrance with the Company, but with those who interfered, acknowledging that, as between themselves and the Company, they had walked into the thing with their eyes open, and had adopted it as their own, for better or worse. The covenant on the part of the Company, that they had good right to convey, for quiet enjoyment, and, for further, assurance, were entered into with a proviso, which was perfectly understood by the purchasers, and the bona fide meaning and intention of the proviso cannot be altered by quibbles, such as that of neither anticipating nor asking a title good against the Government, but expecting- and having a right to one which the natives would recognise. The natives recognise ? Have the natives, then, never sold their land twice ? Coming to a country where there were no legal means of enforcing such rights, when objected to, did the first settlers expect to walk into every acre without opposition ? or, if not, were the Company to provide an army to give possession by force ? or, if not that, did they believe that the cupidity of the half-savage was not inextinguishable by feeding it, and that additional gifts and presents would not be building a barrier to keep them from their lands ? If not^Jfer of this, what then? Why this, they knew that they were coming into a country where they would have to struggle against opposition of this sort, where, with the patient endurance and persevering courage with which other Englishmen have overcome greater difficulties, and, aided by the means of combination which the assistance of the Company afforded, and the consciousness of an equitable claim which the purchase of the Company afforded, they might plant themselves and settle according to the scheme originally laid- down as amongst themselves alone, but as " God and

their right" might aid them, as between themselves and others-* Ifc was in the full knowledge that such would be their case, if the British Government did not take possession of the islands ; and it was with the determination to take the risk upon themselves of such an adjudication of their claims as the Government might see fit to make, if there should be such pbssession, and expecting, and juftly, the influence of the Company at home to be exerted to the utmost in their favour. And now, how does the case stand, that there should be Jhis turning round, snarling, unjust crimination upon those who joined in this venture with you, with a , different field of action ? Why just that circumstances have made you part of it, different to what was expected — not harder, it is not that, but a different state of things has supervened, less stimulating to the spirit of adventure than that which had been expected, and not having that confident, law-assuring character which such a change requires to make it easy to bear. And now that the Government has stepped in, what is there in the arrangements made between the Company and the Government that the Port Nicholson settlers have to grumble at ? It is somewhat better than that which their deputation expressed themselves willing to accept from Sir George Gipps, at all events. If our readers will refer to the agreement wluch we published the other day, they must perceive that the Government are bound to put the Company in possession of any amount of land (not being more than 160,000 acres), in the districts of Port Nicholson and Taranaki, which should be coming to them under the terms therein expressed, Mr. Pennington being employed to calculate the expenditure, and make the award accordingly. According to that award, the Company became entitled to the full 800,000 acres in all.

The very fact of the terms being entered into at all shows that the Government in-" tended to take upon themselves the onus of gaining and giving title and possession. With individual claimants, the only terms that there was an opportunity of making were those of granting an acre for every five shillings given to the Maories for the land"; but, as regarded the Company, the number of five shillings which was to regulate the number of acres granted was to be shown as having been expended, not only in purchase of the v Maories, but in all the other modes of outlay specified in the agreement. In the very nature of things, therefore, the Government must have contemplated throwing the onus upon themselves ; since, if five shillings an acre was a fair price for the Maories to receive, and the Government agreed to grant land in consideration of many other five shillings quite otherwise expended than in utu to the Maories, they must have contemplated supplying the Maories with this five shillings per acre, or its equivalent, to make their bargain just to the sellers to them, and to afford a safe title to those buying of them. The disclaimer of the Government, Tn that agreement, of any bond on their part to make good the sales by the Company to individuals does not affect the question as between the settlers and the Company ; they were bound up together ; and the settlers expected — nay, knew, and they have not been deceived — that whatever advantages might accrue out of the arrange* ments between the Company and the Go- * vernment, they would have their share. It is for the Government, unquestionably, to grant the land to and put the Company in possession. The purchase-money of the Company is the expenditure allowed by Mr. Pennington to have been made, and acknowledged by the Government. The Company s with a view, to the interests of the settlers, made the best arrangement they could with the Government: the settlers were bound, as a matter of course and' as acknowledged by the Colonist, to take all . risk of the Government stepping in at any time. Supposing that the requirement of Sir G. Gipps as to the continuous blocks were to be acceded to by the Company — and their not doing so in other cases has been, doubtless, the chief obstacle to the settling of the question of the titles — would the Wellington settlers be inclined to act

upon the suggestion of their deputation, and divide their lots into portions of equal value ? While speaking of continuous blocks, we may just say that the plan is impracticable in this country, the other terras of purchase remaining the same : the nature of the country will not allow it, except on altogether different terms.

As to the impolicy of thus turning round upon the C&mpany, instead of supporting them to the utmost in their endeavours to secure the best possible terms from the . Government for the settlers, not themselves (for that is the fact), it is manifest that, with a body of gentlemen, such as the Directors — many of whom are solely actuated by their desire to see their experiment in colonization succeed, and with whom there is no pecuniary object in the matter whatever — it is manifest,*nre say, that such conduct on the part of those for whom they have so long exercised all their influence, and spent so much time and trouble, can produce no effect but disgust and a determination to have nothing more to do with the affair. Human nature is not strong enough to bear this sort of blow with patience and resignation : opposition from an enemy is expected, and only stimulates to overcome ; but this kicking backwards, from a friend upon whom benefits have been showered, few can away with. In a despatch to the principal agent, there are remarks deprecating jealousy on the part of the other settlements because of greater outlay on the part of the Company in emigration and employment of labour at Wellington. As to the probability of any jealousy on the subject, we do not care to^sueak ; but certainly the tone adopted by the Colonist is the best mode of removing all further cause for it ; since, however much the Company may have hitherto expended on Wellington beyond what they were at all bound to do, they are not likely to continue the expenditure if it is so received. One of two things is likely to follow ; first, that the really disinterested members of the Direction will throw up the whole thing in disgust, and that it will fall into the hands of those seeking for profit alone ; and we think that some difference would be discovered at Wellington under such circumstances, and not for the better : or, supposing this not to result, it will not be difficult for them to persuade themselves that any claim upon their special consideration, on account of risks and hardships run and endured in first settling, have been cancelled by bitterness and abuse, and that, unwilling to give up the object itself, they only alter the direction of the special interest previously monopolized, and divide amongst the whole that which the favoured portion have so ungraciously received.

The schooner Imp, from the coast, encountered a squall at the entrance of the Gulf, in which a heavy sea carried away her bulwarks, boat, and one of her crew.

Yesterday,, the first sale by auction of land reserved for sale in the colonies took place at the Company's store. It was a suburban section of 50 acres, situated at the Motuaka, and brought £200. The purchaser was Captain Fearon, who intends settling on it.

By the Royal William, we have the Colonist of the 19th of May, and the Gazette of the 20th. They contain nothing of interest beyond an account of the dinner given by the Mayor and Corporation to the Commandant of the French frigate and his officers. Some surprise was excited by the absence of every Government official ; and a party who consider themselves the " aristocracy " oF the place also absented tl.emselves. The latter worthies, it appears, clubbed together the price of the tickets, to form the nucleus of a savings bank. We are told that the Frenchmen's entertainers were not a little startled on the Saturday morning at seeing the frigate weigh anchor and depart, when they expected a gala on board that day.

We beg to acquaint our subscribers and friends that the present number closes a quarter of our paper.

Pumpkin Soup. — Cut four or five thick slices of pumpkin into small pieces, put them on the fire with as much water as will cover the bottom of your saucepan : add eight or ten onions, and when all is sufficiently boiled to pulp, pass it through a cullender; then put three or four onions previously sliced, when they are fried of a light brown, add to them your pulp, with as much, milk as will render the whole of the consistency ■of thick cream. Toasted bread, cut in slices, is an improvement Passengers going in a ship which carries a milch cow, may, at this season of tbe year, have an excellent soup from England to New Zealand. Let any intended emigrant who reads this receipt, try it at this time. It is universally to be met with at the first tables in Prance, care being taken not to bruise the pumpkins; if they are hung up by the stalk to the ceiling, they will keep from October to May. — New Zealand Journal, Nov. 26. j