THE KAWAU CASE.

New Zealander, Volume 2, Issue 69, 26 September 1846, Page 2

THE KAWAU CASE.

Tub proceedings in the Supreme Court, on the 16th inst., have created very general interest, and the pleadings, which we have given at length, will probably be read with more than ordinary attention.

The popular belief seems to be, that if thedecision of the Court should be unfavourable to the defendants, all the titles of parties who have exchanged the Land they originally purchased of the Natives, for Land, in the district adjacent to Auckland, will be invalidated. We are quite of a different opinion, and we hold this view irrespective of any consideration of the merits of the particular question now at issue. Without attempting to express a decided opinion upon the merits of the claim of Messrs. WhitakerandHeale,_or staying to enquire whether the Deed they hold is a good and legal conveyance, we venture, at once, to assert our conviction, that it is a case of dis-* tinct and different character, and bears no such analogy to the claims of those who hold in virtue of Land acquired by Scrip granted to them in exchange for other Land, as wouldwarrant the conclusion that the validity of their titles must stand or fall by the decision, of the Court in the present instance. Nevertheless, the" case affords another striking illustration of the eccentric proceedigs of the Government of New Zealand. When are the acts of the Rulers of this Colony to be stamped with the seal of permanency ? Are the Colonists to be tossed upon the sea of uncertainty, and their enterprises rendered nugatory by the shifting winds of succeeding administration. Truly it is time our destinies were fixed ; our interests are too precious to to be dependent upon the different constructions that may be put upon Acts of Governors or Acts of Parliament. If the Attorney-Ge-neral deems Lord Stanley's despatch of no weight when compared with the Land Sales Act, why did he not, as the legal adviser of the Local Government, intimate his opinion earlier ? Well might Mr. Whitaker say, that this gentleman occupied an anomalous position while urging the Court to annul a grant which was issued, if not in strict accordance, yet ostensibly under the authority of the instructions of the Home Government. Whatever views the learned Attorney-General may take upon the subject, and however the Courfc may decide in the case now before it, we again repeat, that neither the one nor the other will affect the titles of those who exchanged their Lands. The mere fact of their not having paid cash for their Lands, as required by the "Land Sales Act," will never be deemed a sufficient reason for throwing all the landed interests of the Colony into confusion, ,