New Zealand Colonist TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 1842.

New Zealand Colonist and Port Nicholson Advertiser, Volume I, Issue 15, 20 September 1842, Page 2

New Zealand Colonist TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 1842.

We understand that a public Meeting of the Inhabitants of this place will be held at Barrett’s Hotel on Wednesday next, to take into consideration the measures to be adopted with reference to the approaching election of town councillors. We believe that the Meeting has been convened by those gentlemen who have framed the list published by Mr. St. Hill, and that the object of the Meeting is to obtain a public demonstration in their favor. Tliere. be no objection to this mode of endeavouring to secure for the candidates that support which their own emuneration of the merits which they claim, and of the good deeds they will perform, may obtain. But it will be a curious study to watch the various grounds upon which the introduction of some names into, and the exclusion of other names from,

that list arc accounted for and justified. That there are the. names of many persons on that list whom every, well wisher of the colouy would desife to see in the Council we readily admit, but those by whom that list was prepared must have been sorely puzzled to find unobjectionable names when they brought forward some of the individuals whom they have named as candidates. We suspect that there are not a few among them whcAhemselves

“ Wonder how the devil they got there.” A regard for the sensitive modesty of these gentlemen restrains us from naming them. But almost every one of our readers will he able for himself to fix upon the names in question. Our object, however, in referring to this subject, Was chiefly to call the attention of our readers to one circumstance. In the list, as proposed, there are about eleven out of the eighteen who may be considered independent. Whether their vote agreed or disagreed with the views and wishes of the community, they would give it, we believe, according to their own sense of right, and not because it suited the views of an individual or a clique. But there are seven who, if elected, would form a majority of the Town Council, who cannot he considered as any thing but the instruments of a party. Supposing that the list put forth by the gentlemen who have called the Meeting to which we refer, is agreed to, because of the apparent preponderance of independent men—it will he a very easy matter for those who are behind the scenes to contrive, just at the last, that the seven, for whom alone they are really anxious, should be put at the head of the poll; securing to their side a safe majority, and putting the majority of the independent candidates in the position merely of a corps de resei've, out of which the vacancies, which might take place in the Council, are to be filled up. Against this it is expedient that the voters should he upon their guard; and it probably will suffice to have called attention to the subject, to secure the defeat of any such manoeuvre, if it should be attempted.

We have never been disposed to claim for ourselves any peculiar sagacity in the advice which we have given with regard to the policy that ought to have been pursued by the people of this place, whatever the Gazette may think of it. We have thought that the violent party were peculiarly absurd; hut we never imagined ourselves to shew any extraordinary wisdom in avoiding the errors into which they fell. On the contrary, it always seemed to us most extraordinary, that, when prudence so plainly dictated our line of conduct, the leaders of that day should have insisted, so pertinaciously, in pursuing the very opposite. We did think they were eminently foolish; but just on that account we were prevented from considering ourselves particularly wise. In fact, the conduct which we suggested at that period, differed from that actually pursued only in one particular : it provided against possible contingencies. We do not pretend to have foreseen that Lord John Russell was to leave office, and .that his place was to he filled by Lord Stanley. We hardly remember whe-' ther we contemplated this as a circumstance to be taken into calciilation. But whether we did or not, we would have pursued a course not in any respect less calculated to serve our purpose, if all had turned out as was anticipated, and equally available under every combination of events. We wanted to serve the Colony, and looked at the course to be pursued only under that aspect: our opponents had their private objects of pique, or ambition, or revenge, to gratify, and their views were consequently distorted, and their course irregular and injudicious. We doubt, however, whether the opposite party have learned any degree of wisdom by experience. They have always seemed to us perseveringly wrong-headed. And if the experience of the last four months is to be taken as a guide, it may be said of them, as it was of the Bourbons—they have learned nothing, and they have forgotten nothing. They have not acquired one new idea, nor lost one old prejudice. They seem to be among those who will not learn even from their own experience.

At a public meeting which was held at Auckland on the sth of August, for the purpose of taking into consideration measures for benefiting

the condition of Ihe settlement, Mr. Cormack adverted to the circumstance of the sum of £50,000. being placed in the estimates as the proceeds expected to be. realised .from crown land sales during the' present year, eiglit months of which had already expired, when no more than £6OOO. had been obtained. The fact of there being no land advertised for sale in the Government Gazette was also commented upon. We believe the course hitherto pursued in both New South Wales and Van Dieman’s Land, has been always to have a larger‘quantity of surveyed land than i$ expected to be actually required for the necessities of the settlers, and that, in such localities as are supposed to be most likely in requisition. The settlers in those colonies have also the benefit of selecting the land they are desirous of and upon application to government, its measurement is effected at the earliest opportunity. Such has not been the case in New Zealand. A tract of land is purchased by government, the .site of a township and country sections determined upon, without reference to the wishes or conveniences of the parties most likely to become buyers, and the system of forced centralisation strongly insisted upon. Is it probable, that men who have expended capital in pui chases fiom the natives of ground which they have brought into cultivation, upon which they have erected their houses, and where they enjoy, at least, a decent proportion of comfort, should quit their homes and endure the labours and inconveniences which they have before surmounted ? We do not think that it is' ’likely, the more especially when the enormous sum of one pound per acre is established as the upset price. The fallacy of the expectations formed on raising the minimum price in New South Wales from ss. to 12s. per acre, even where the settler has the choice of his selection, should act as a convincing proof to the government that the present system will be a complete failure. A question however arises, as to the power possessed by the governor to raise or depress the minimum price of land. If we recollect rightly, the governor of South Australia took upon himself to continue the minimum price of land in that colony, subject, of course, to the approval of the home government. Sir Geo'rge Gipps regulates the price of allotments in the different townships, according to their relative estimated valuation. New Zealand has not had the advantages afforded to the first colonizers of New South Wales and Van Dieman’s Land; they were allowed land gratis, at the rate of four hundred acres for every £IOO. brought out by them, either in cash ,or property, convict labour was afforded them, rations allowed for themselves and establishment, cattle lent them, and grain given for their first planting. The inconsiderable price paid by the government to the natives for the large tracts of land they have bought here, cannot be brought forward as a reason for imposing the high upset price now existing. We are not aware that, in any one instance, has even half the sum of ss. per acre been paid for lands bought by government from the natives. The impolicy of imposing the present high minimum price is evident to the natives as well as to Europeans, the discrepancy between the amount given and that demanded, naturally presents itself to their minds, and the consequence may probably ensue, that at some no very distant period they will raise their demands to the same standard as that required by government. The subject is one of such importance as to require more time and consideration than we can at present bestow upon it. We shall not, however, let it drop. — Communicated.