MR. COMMISSIONER COWELL'S REPORT. London, 23d June, 1847.

New Zealand Spectator and Cook's Strait Guardian, Volume IV, Issue 270, 1 March 1848, Page 3

MR. COMMISSIONER COWELL'S REPORT. London, 23d June, 1847.

* (a) Mr. William Swainson, of the Hutt Valley, near Wellington, in New Zealand, having addressed a letter from thence, dated December 15, 1845, conveying to your Lordsfiip, oti the part oi the Resident Land, Purchasers of the New Zealand Company, a printed Letter from them to the Directors of that Company, dated Wellington, New Zealand, September 23,- 1846, containing allegations of injuries inflicted upon them by Jhe Said Directors, and demands of compensation ; your Lordship, after having called tipon th 6 Directors of the New Zealand Company to proffer such explanations as might seem g<SGd to them, was pleased to direct me to examine into the allegations of the settlers on the one side, and into the explanations relative thereto afforded by the Directors of the Company on the other. Accordingly, having compared and investigated the statements and counter- statements of the parties respectively, and having called for all such evidentiary and elucidatory matter from the New Zealand Directors as seemed to me calculated to throw any light on the subject, I have the honor to submit the subjoined statement for your Lordship's consideration. The Letter of the Settlers, dated Wellington, 23d September, 1846, contains their r case against the Directors of the New Zealand Company, very powerfully, and apparently, very fully stated. They make three several demands for compensation, on three several grounds. They appeal to the Directors of the Company " not (they say, page 9) as suppliants for their bounty — not as men suing for favour at their hands, but as parties deeply and grievously injured — as men protesting against great wrongs inflicted by them, and as such, demanding redress. First, then," they continue (addressing the Directors), "we claim compensation for the loss we have incurred from your inability to fulfil the contract mad.c with us seven years ago." They then proceed, p. 13, to draw a picture of their losses, saying, that afterhaving brought out a capital estimated at from £1,000,000 to £2,000,000, they have not, up to the day they are writing, a Crown title to a single acre of land, that of all the land selected they have only obtained precarious possession of a few thousand acres ; that they have been doomed to inactivity for six years ; that instead of employing their capital productively, they have- been forced to subsist upon it ; that they have been ex,posed to the aggressions of hostile savages, who have destroyed houses, burnt crops, and murdered some industrious settlers ; that there are but few who are not irretrievably ruined : "And to what causes," they add (addressing the Directors in p. 14,) *' are the disasters which have befallen us attributable ?" — ', You cannot and dare not deny, that the immediate and proximate cause of our ruin has been the non-fulfilment by you of the contract formed^ with us seven years ago." (*) Finding in this manner that the first of the three great wrongs which the settlers brought under consideration was averred, as well in the beginning as in the conclusion of the statement setting it forth, to consist in the non-fulfilment of the contract made in .1839, I desired to take such instrument into consideration. I found that, strictly speakj ing, there existed noinstrument so entitled^ but that there was constructively, a contract consisting of two separate instruments, viz., The Prospectus of the Company, dated lsl June 1839, and the document entitled " New Zealand Landdrder." I annex copies t»f these documents, of 'which the "Landorder" does' virtually at? tain to the character r of a contract; because it' embodies the conditions of a sale of land ] byHhe Directors of' the Company, in witness 'of which 1 it beats the .signatures ofthree 'of the Directors, while its counterpart exhibits that J of the party purchasing. ; Thesetwo in 7 struments constitute the contract which the signers 'of th6 J letter affirm hasnot been fulfilled bjr the Directors,- and r they claim comperisation" for" this alleged' non-fulfilment, andforlthe losses they haWur consequence sustained. . ' They claim it withthe Prospectus and the 'Landorder themselves in their hands as evidence- at once of their quality^ 'settlers, and of their right to compensation ; and J it certainly wasdifficult for me at first to conceive how they could have been led, thus to bring forward documents which sa completely disprove their allegations,' and take from under them all ground to any title to compensation -whatever.

♦ The letters in.' italics tefer. the ■ leaolutions- respectively to those , parts of ,Mr. -Cowell's Beport, of whicfcUJgE «* «» answer. '