[From the Times, July 13.]

New Zealand Spectator and Cook's Strait Guardian, Volume IV, Issue 246, 8 December 1847, Page 4

[From the Times, July 13.]

Mr. Hawes moved the second reading of the New Zealand (No. 2) Bill, and in so doing entered into a history of the previous transactions between the New Zealand Company and the Government. He then described the principal provisions of the bill, from which it appeared that there was to be in future a special commissioner for the affairs of the New Zealand Company — that her Majesty's Treasury was empowered to advance to that Company £136,000 in three years out of the Consolidated Fund, on the security and credit of the lands and tenements which it held in New Zealand ; and that the New Zealand Company was also empowered to dispose of all the lands which it had acquired in that colony for the repayment of the said loan. The bill also enabled the Company to relinquish their undertaking within three calendar months after the sth of April, 1850, and it contained a proviso whereby a sum of £268,370 15s. was to be paid to it as a compensation for its property, being at the rate of ss. for each acre of the 1,073,483 acres which the£ompany i now occupied. J3e thought that th^SSovern-

ment had obtained a fair security for the money which it had advanced. If the New Zealand Company should succeed, and should sell its land, there could be no doubt as to the repayment of this loan r but if it failed, we had, at any rate, the security of one million of acres to fall back upon. In supporting this bill, his first object was to give encouragement to voluntaiy associations for colonization, and his second was to give encouragement to the influx of voluntary labourers from England into our colonies. The object which he had in view was a national object, and the money advanced to accomplish it was advanced on fair conditions. Lord G. Bentinck would not resist this bill, but could not allow it to pass without stating, that it was in contravention of all the principles laid down by the Government in the early part of the present session. The Government had then said, that it would not become a moneylender, and, more especially, that it would not become a moneylender to destitute shareholders. But the Government was now coming forward to lend £136,000 to the New Zealand Company, and for the express purpose of rescuing it from its difficulties. If the speculation of the Company should go on well, we should hear no more about this loan ; but, if it failed, then the Government was to stand in the place of the Company, and was to puachase back the land of the colony, at the price of £250,000. As he was inclined to cherish the colonies, and felt that this colony would be one of great importance to the country, and as he was also aware that there was this difference between New Zealand and the Canadas, that the capital advanced to New Zealand must remain in the colony, and could not be carried across the border, he should not resist this measure, but ' should allow it to pass with the observations which he had already made upon it. Sir R. lnglis should be sorry if this debate were to close without reference to the conduct of the natives of New Zealand. Real goodness and greatness was manifested by them in the course of the last struggle. They had shown a degree of forbearance which had not been exceeded in any age of chivalry in Europe. After some questions of Mr. W, Patten, respecting the details of the bill, had been answered by Mr. Hawes, Mr. Y. Smith raked up the old controversy relative to the merits of the New Zealand Company, which must be considered as a bankrupt company, inasmuch as it had paid no dividends for the last four years. He objected to one clause in this bill, by which her Majesty submitted the appointments which she made in the colony to the approbation of the New Zealand Company. Mr. C. Buller denied that this Company had become a bankrupt, although its finances might have fallen into some derangement. So far as colonization was concerned, it could not be said to have been unsuccessful. The bill did not impose upon the Government the liabilities of the Company. Mr. Hume repeated his old doctrines of the mismanagement of the Colonial office, and contended that the failure of the colony of New Zealand was attributable to that cause. The loan which we were now going to advance to the New Zealand Company was but part of the price which we had to pay for the mismanagement of the Government. For that mismanagement there would be no cure until we extended to the colony her right of selfgovernment. After a few observations from Mr. Williams, Sir J. Graham vindicated the conduct of the Colonial-office, whilst under the superintendence of Lord Stanley, from the imputations cast upon it by Mr. Hume, and expressed his willingness to support the loan to the New Zealand Company which was contained in this bill. Indeed, that bill ought to be discussed on its own merits, and not with reference to former debates. Some further conversation took place on this subject, in which Lord Ingestre, Mr. l 5 Denison, Mr. Aglionby, and Mr. D'lsraeli took part, and the bill was read a second time.