Parliamentary Papers.

New Zealander, Volume 10, Issue 883, 30 September 1854, Page 3

Parliamentary Papers.

NEW ZEALAND COMPANY'S DEBT, (AUCKLAND.) [APPENDIX TO r.EPORT.] Minutes of Evidence taken before the Select Committee on the New Zealand Company's Debt (Auckland). Friday. BthJdly, JB.\4. Members present: —Air. WorUey, Mr. Porter, Mr. Mackay, Mr. King, Mr. Carlclon. Mr. E. (1. Wakefield in (he Chair. The Honourable Francis Dillon Bell, Esq. examined. i. By Ihc Chairman:—You were for a lone; lime in the employment of the New Zealand Company ' Yes, 1 was. 2. For some time as Secretary to the Company? Yes, for some lime as Secretary, in England, and afterwards their agent for the management of the Nelson Settlement. 5. Do you recollect the circumstances connected with I he Company's proceedings at Auckland, as respects the selection of a block of land ? Yes. •i. Will you besogood as to slate them to the Committee? The Company made an agreement with Lord Stanley, by which they were to select 30,000 acres of "land here, in lieu of 50,000 acres, part of a block to which they were entitled in the South, under the agreement, and I was appointed to make the selection. The condition of the agreement was, that the Company should, within a certain time, expend a considerable portion of .* 50,000 in colonizing operations at Auckland. I believe it was threefourths. I came to Auckland and made a selection of town land and suburban land to the amount, 1 believe, of 10,000 L, part of the 50,000 L, and I made examination of various parts of the country for the purpose of selecting the remainder, chiefly in rural land. Governor Filzroy objected to the most valuable selections I had made in the town of Auckland, which 1 believed to be a contravention of the agreement of Lord Stanley, and the question was referred to the then principal agent ol the Company at Wellington, Col. Wakefield. Some negocialions ensued between Col. Wakefield and the local government on the subject of finally compleling the selection of land at Auckland, but as the proceedings of Governor FilzKoy were believed by the agents of the New Zealand Company to be calculated to destroy the agreement, one condition of which was the selection of land at Auckland, the whole subject was referred to England, among other questions of dispute between the local government and the Company's local agents the result was that the selection of the land was was not finally completed as intended at Auckland, and lhat the Company took no steps for laying out the money to which 1 have referred. In May, 1847, when the lime was expiring within which the Company would be bound to have expended the money, they came to a fresh agreement with Earl Grey, by which they gave up the land they claimed lo have selected at Auckland, and declared they would tako no steps for colonizing at Auckland. This Treed the land which I had chosen, and which for some years had been kept out of the market here, to the injury ol the settlers, who found some very valuable land locked up from occupation by them without the fulfilment of the condition by which they were to receive any benefit from the Com pany's operations. The agreement of May, 1817, was Ihc agreement by which, at the same time lhat the Company gave up the Auckland land, the * ompany'g Debt was to be charged on the whole colony. Such are the facts briefly staled so far as I now remember them. , f ;. You have no doubl of their accuracy, and I wont ask you lo say that you have a very good memory. I believe they are correctly stated. G. Are you aware of any other right of selection under the agreement of 1817? There was

Ino right of selection under the agreement of ; 1847, except that the < ompany gave up any i right to lake up any land at Auckland. The j Demesne lands of the Crown in the whole of the Southern Provinces were to be invested in the Company, including 4,300,000 acres, lo which (he ( ompany's riant was recognised I»y I.oid Stanley in \Hi:i but then l!ie agie.-nienl of May, 1847, provided for the re-purchase of the estate] of the < ompany by the imposition of a charge on (he whole land of the colony. 7. So that (he crown purchased an estate which only existed in the Southern Settlements by means of a charge on the vvtoole colony, including of course the Northern Settlements? Yes, thai is my view of (he subject. 8- Will you be so good as to define what you mean by North and South? I should define North and South by the country to the Northward of Mokau, which was generally supposed lo be the Northern boundary of the Southern Settlements.

9- lsy Mr. Porter:—Was there in 1817, still lime for sending out the emigrants according lo the acrcement of Lord Stanley ? It was in lime, because the Government bad construed the three years to he from Ihe lime of selection under agreement, and Ihe prohibition by Governor Fitzßoy in March 1814, of Ihe most valuable selections I had made in Ihe (own was the chief cause of Ihe selection not being completed; and iflhe Government in England had considered the period lapsed, there would have been no necessity for the surrender of the ( ompany in 1847.

10. The selections that were made, took place iu 184 i ? In January, 1811, \ believe. 11. Which were kepi possession of by Ihe Company liil Ihe lima expired within which Ihey ought lo have sent out the emigrants according lo agreement? Yes, I have already said to Ihe injury of Ihe Auckland settlers. 12- By Mr. King:—ln your opinion did Ihe settlers of Auckland derive any benefit lb rough Ihe abandonment hythcCompany of its claims lo land in Auckland ? I should say lo a certain extent Ihey did, because the Company never heartily meant to colonize Auckland, and the surrender of its lands was lo some extent a reparalion of the injury which the lands being locked by Ihe Company, bad caused lo Ihe settlers 17). By Mr. ( arlelon :—You said thai a certain advantage was derived lo Auckland by Ihe abandonment of Ibis right; might not this advantage have been of a negative character. Ihe mere cessation of a disadvantage under which Auckland had been placed by Ihe ■ ompany » Yes. and I also think llial if ihe < ompany had retained the lands. Ihey would very probably have sold a large proportion of it lo absentees as Ihey did in Ihe" other settlements which would have been a greal injury lo Auckland. 14. : y Mr. r/orur whether the colonising operations of the Company would not have counterbalanced to a certain extent the evils of sales to absentees'? I don't think so because I don't think they wished to colonize Auckland well. The whole thing was forced upon them by government and they undertook it with reluctance.

15. By Mr. Mackay :—Co you think that the land now to be acquired from the natives in the Northern Ptovinces ought to bear its proportion of the Debt now placed against the colony by the Home Government, the funds for which purpose being derivable from the general revenue of the colony 1 Discussion ensued as to the propriety of this question, when Mr. Mackay moved that the question be put to Mr. Bell. Mr. Wortley moved as an amendment that the question referred to be not put, as being one requiring the expression of opinion upon the subject of enquiry before the Committee and theiefbre not suitable to be put to one of his Excellency's advisers. Committee divided. Question put that Mr. Wortley *s amendment be agreed to. Ayes. Noes. Messrs. Wortley, Mr. Mackay. King, Pt rter, Carleton. Mr. Bell's Examination was then continued by Mr. Worlley.— 16. Did the Government ever take any steps towards the acquisition of the 50,000 acres in the South, out of the Company's estate which they were to have in exchange for the concession of land to the Company at, Auckland 1 No, it was not necessary, for the 50,000 acres were only part of a larger amount they would have to give the Company. 17. Did the Company ever make any arrangements for fulfilling their agreement of colonizing in the North 1 Never, so far as I know. IS. Can you state what prevented their doin.r so » I believe the disputes arising out of Governor Fitz Roy's proceedings in the riiß" place, and the native disturbance in the second, besides their disinclination to do the thing at all. 19. By the Chairman :—Was not that disinclination so general as to indispose the Company to have any thing to do with the North for good, bad, or indifferent ? I have no doubt of it. 20. By Mr. Wortley :—You state distinctly that the Company relinquished its claims at Auckland, on condition of the imposition of the debt on the whole colony ? No, what I said was, that the same agreement contained th** two conditions. 21. It is your opinion that the Company considered the imposition of the debt on the whole colony, including Auckland as a main consideration for iis relinquishment of its land claims in the Auckland district, which you cime here to carry out? I should say it was an inducement, but at the same time I have Aot a doußt that the Company were g ad to get rid of the obligation to colonize at Auckland. 22. By the Chairman:—ln fact the Company never set any store by its claim to select land at Auckland? I should answer to that it would, if Governor Fitz Hoy had notl revented the land from being chosen, of which I had given a favourable report. But in point of fact, as I have said before, they never liked the agreement, always abused Auckland whenever they could, and were very glad to escape from connection with it. •23. By Mr. Carleton-.—When the Company by agreement with the Secretary of St ue, became conditional owners of a considerable portion of the best land in the town, suburbs, and country, did they not at the same time take upon themselves an obligation m honour (these being the ipamima verba) to carry out to the best of their ability the colonising views which they expressed when the agreement was made? Yes, but I would beg to remark that the " obligation in honour" on the Company's part presupposed an honourable fulfilment by the Government, of the conditions of the obligation, and this was not done. 24. By the Chairman -.—l conclude that no membir of this Committee has held pn.vate communication with you on this subject previous to your coming here ? None whatever since the Committee was appointed. This concluded Mr. Bell's examination.