New Zealand Spectator, AND COOK'S STRAIT GUARDIAN. Wednesday, February 16, 1848.

New Zealand Spectator and Cook's Strait Guardian, Volume IV, Issue 266, 16 February 1848, Page 2

New Zealand Spectator, AND COOK'S STRAIT GUARDIAN. Wednesday, February 16, 1848.

We noticed in our last number a meeting of Land Purchasers, which was held for the purpose of hearing Mr. Commissioner Cowell's Report on their Letter to the New Zealand Company. As this official document may be taken to express the bias of the present rulers in the Colonial Office, it may be as well to give a short account of the circumstances connected with it previous to entering into an examination of its statements. Towards the close of the year 1 846. Mr. Swainson, one of our oldest and most respected settlers forwarded to Lord Grey a copy of the printed Letter to the Directors, which he accompanied by a letter repeating and enforcing the charges it contained, and begging that its statements would receive his Lordship's serious attention, and that the settlers might look for some alleviation of the misfortunes and ruin caused by the Company's mismanagement, in the justice, the sympathy, and good faith of her Majesty's Ministers. This correspondence was handed over to Mr. Cowell, who had been newly appointed to his present office, with instructions to examine into the allegations of the settlers contained in the letter addressed to the New Zealand Company on the one hand, and the explanations of them afforded by the Directors on the other, and to make his report to Lord Grey on them. His report, which has been officially communicated to the Land Purchasers, appears to have re-

ceived his Lordship's approbation, and may therefore be considered as the official and conclusive answer of the Colonial Office. Want of space prevents us from entering into a very detailed examination of the statements contained in this Report, which occupies thirty-eight foolscap pages, or from offering a systematic refutation, nor is this necessary since we believe it is intended to prepare an elaborate answer which will shortly be published. But it may be useful to give an outline of Mr. Cowell's Report and to notice b.iefly one or two of his principal arguments. Mr. Cowell in his examination of the letter of the Resident Land Purchasers states, that they make three several demands for compensation on three several grounds. Ist. They claim compensation for the loss incurred from the inability of the Directors to fulfil their contract made seven years ago. 2nd. They claim to be allowed to throw up the worthless land which they had been compelled to select, and that districts nearer to Port Nicholson and more available than some of those which have been surveyed shall be purchased and thrown open for their selection, and 3rdly. That the lands obtained by the Company from Lord John Russell as compensation on account of that portion of the purchase money which the Company undertook to expend as Trustees, in giving value to the lands of the Principal Settlement shall be appropriated to its legitimate object, and not diverted to the benefit and use of the Company who only acquired them by means of the funds of those for whom they acted as Trustees. These claims Mr. Cowell decides cannot be maintained, that " the assertions contained in the letter invariably turn out to be either immaterial unsupported by proofs, or in singular contrast with what he understands to be the facts — that in his deliberate opinion the charges made by the Land Purchasers against the Directors of the New Zealand Company are not warranted by any facts or evidence they have adduced, that the Directors have not inflicted upon the settlers any one of the wrongs of which the writers of the letter accuse them, that the whole case of the letter writers entirely fails, that the manner in which the case is prepared and worked up, unequivocally betrays in several instances the clearest signs of general bad faith, and concludes by submitting that the very unfavourable impressions regarding them which the letter is calculated to produce on every impartial mind should be carefully confined to those whose names are attached to it, and by no means intended to affect the character of any of the other resident settlers at Wellington and Wanganui.'' Now when a person is appointed to act as mediator between contending parties, when he is invested with the character of arbitrator of conflicting interests, and whose duty as Government Commissioner should, as Lord Grey has stated in a late despatch " obviously lead him to consider every operation of the Company for the disposal of Crown lands with reference not alone to the interests of the Company, but the interests of the public both here and in New Zealand," — such a one is bound by every consideration of fairness to spare no pains in arriving at a. just and impartial conclusion. When, therefore, Mr. Commissioner Cowell makes such serious imputations against the character of the land purchasers signing the letter, when he ventures to impeach their veracity, and accuse them of general bad faith, when he dares to assert that their characters are affected, and a stigma attached to them by the unfavourable impressions the letter is calculated to produce, we should imagine that the arguments and statements contained in their letter had been refuted on the clearest and most unanswerable testimony. Let us examine his method of dealing with the first charge, about which he 13 most elaborate. The settlers claim compensation from the New Zealand Company for the loss incurred from not receiving their lands, owing to the Company's inability to fulfil their contract. Mr. Cowell denies they are either legally or morally entitled to compensation, and rests

his. decision on the prospectus and landorder of the Company ; ' but with the dishonesty of a hired partisan rather than the impartiality of an arbitrator, while affecting to quote from the latter document, he interpolates these words, " but take notice that we do not mean to guarantee the title to the land we are going to sell, and which you are going to buy, &c." But does Mr. Cowell seriously mean to assert, that after the Directors had received the money of the Land Purchasers, they were not bound, legally and morally, to give an equivalent ? Does he mean to say, that any act of the British Government short of a positive? prohibition to the Company to acquire land in New Zealand could ever absolve them of this obligation ? Is he not aware that these landorders were issued by the Company after they had received the money of the Land Purchasers ? Is it not notorious that until their title to the land was completed last year by the Government (and the fact of this interference shews the want of due diligence and proper management on the part of the Company and its Agent*-), the Company were unable to give possession of the greater portion of the land in ■ the neighbourhood of this Settlement ? Do not the disturbances, the robberies, the murders on the Hutt, the necessity for the presence of a large military force in this Settlement , the present state of Wanganui, and the ruined condition of its settlers, justify and confirm the truth of the charges made by the land purchasers, and prove the inability of the Directors to fulfil their engagements ? Mr. Cowell then proceeds from the contemplation of the claims of the purchasers to the consideration of their number, quality and condition, and for this purpose applies to Mr E. J. Wakefield as "the only personal evidence accessible" to him, and receives implicitly his unsupported testimony as decisive of the question. Now Mr. Cowell ought to have known that there were many other persons equally accessible, who had been longer resident in the colony, possessing perhaps a greater stake in it, and who were better informed on the subject. For example we dare say Dr. Evans would be considered by an impartial person as competent, accessible, and well informed a witness as Mr. Wakefield, why was not his evidence received ? A ter some statements relative to the number of land purchasers in the settlement, and of a working man's as - sociation for the purchase of land, which has existed five or six years ! but which was defunct for some time previous to Mr/E.' J. Wakefield's departure from the colony, Mr. Cowell affirms on this respectable authority that only thirty-seven out of the fifty»five signers are original purchasers, that these thirty-seven only purchased among them 1 one hundred and sixteen sections, that they have since sold among themselves about a third part of this land, in all cases at a large advance on the original price, in some at almost incredible profits ! and upon this testimony discredits the statements of the landpurchasers and affects to think they have nothing to complain of. It is not necessary for our present purpose to test the accuracy of these statements ; but supposing for the sake of argument the proportion "of original purchasers.,.fcopa. the Company, and secondary purchasers from original purchasers," — of those signing the letter to be as stated by Mr. E. J. Wakefield, does Mr, Cowell suppose the claim of the one to be less strong than that of the other ? Until the Company have fulfilled their obligations to their purchasers — whether this obligation is owing to the original purchaser, or is transferred to another, the obligation is still the same, and equally binding on the Company. The argument about the high price of land, on which Mr. Cowell so confidently relies, is conclusive against him. If he really believes that any country land in the neighbourhood of Wellington can be sold at £40 an acre, he is greatly mistaken^ That some few sectionshave been sold greatly beyond their actual value may be easily accounted for, by the earnest desire of the settlers to obtain land on almost any terms, by the very limited, extent of available land (the greater part of

it being in the possession of absentees), from the inability of the Company to fulfil their contracts, and tho want of roads, thus creating a monopoly of land in favour of the few, and raising its price to an artificial and ruinous height. Such a price might suit very well the purpose of those who entered into the scheme as a lottery, or gambling speculation ; it may answer the purpose of the Directors to parade as facts such statements as these, in the hope of deluding other victims into a participation of their schemes, but the bona fide settler did not leave his country, or sever the ties to which " the heart untravelled fondly turns," for the purpose of conferring a fictitious value on land in New Zealand, but in the hope of aiding by his exertions in founding a prosperous and flourishing colony — of forming in the wilderness a new and happy home. We will offer Mr. Cowell another test which to an impartial person will be found conclusive at once of the truth of the statements and of the justice of the complaints of the land purchasers, and an evidence of the present state of the colony, a fact coming from a less questionable source than Mr. E. J. Wakefield, namely, the present extent of land in cultivation in this settlemeut, which, according to the last official return, amounted only to 1661} acres. Now if the Company had fulfilled their engagements, and the purchasers had besn able to obtain from them secure possession of their land, is it to be imagined that this insignificant amount would include the whole extent of cultivation in this settlement, have we not a right to assume that under such circumfitandes in eight years at least ten times this amount would have been brought under cultivation ? But Mr. Cowell finds in the letter a decisive test of the representations of the settlers in the statement that in founding the first and principal settlement a capital has been expended by them which has been estimated at from £1,000,000 to £2000,0.00. Over thi^ statement he indulges in no little exultation, and after deciding in his way that according to three classes of his own creating the settlers must be supposed to have brought out on an average the immense sum of £40.000, or £10,000 or £5000 each, he rejects the statement as utterly unworthy of credit. Now Mr. Cowell should be informed that this estimate of the capital sunk in the formation of this settlement was made by his present paymasters the New Zealand Company and adopted on their authority. And this has always been the course they have pursued, when an object was to be gained, when an end was to be served, the settlers have been made their cheval de batiille, they have been eloquent over the wrongs, the sufferings, the losses, they have endured but the end once gained, they^ have been content to secure the advantages and have left the settlers to shift for themselves. Want of space compels us to defer the further consideration of this report to our next number.

Waikanab. — For some time past the natives at Waikanae have been making preparations for their return to Taranaki. They intend to go by sea, and will embark in a fleetof 40 canoes, the number of those returning amounting to about three hundred persons. The emigration will be so general that it is expected not more than from thirty to forty persons will remain behind. Their horses, to the number of forty, will be sent overland to Taranaki. The Government have entered into negociations for the purchase of the Waikanae district, and though the arrangements are still in progress there is every reason to believe they will shortly ,arrive at a satisfactory termination*