SIR GEORGE GREY AND THE LAND FUND.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4387, 12 April 1875, Page 2

SIR GEORGE GREY AND THE LAND FUND.

Sib George Grey has made quite a strong point of the land revenue question. He has been cheered to the echo in Auckland, where every one swears by “Grey and the .land fund.” It is-just like Auckland. “Far off fields are “ green,” and “strange birds have fine “ feathers.” The green field in the distance is the Southern land fund, and the strange bird, which struts about in such very fine feathers, a peacock among peacocks, is his Honor Sir George Grey, K.C.B., —not by any manner of means a banneret of that Greek and Maltese order of knighthood ■in which colonial statesmen are enrolled. It is well for Auckland at this crisis that she has a truly knightly champion; and although her knight-errant tilts at political windmills, the reputation of his barren deeds of daring is of more consequence to a chivalrous people than heaps of substantial gain by an ordinarily methodical Superintendent. Auckland has her reward in having elected two of the foremost men in the colony as her Superintendent. Colonel Wy.vyard, when acting-Governor, was the first Superintendent of Auckland ; and Sir George Grey, twice Governor of the colony, is the last of the line. The intermediate links are hardly worth mentioning. They never did anything worth notice beyond this, that Mr. Robert Graham, who acted as bottle-holder to Sir George at his election, “got the province into a “ mess” which Mr. Whitaker was paid for getting it out of. The only other noteworthy feat of a Superintendent of Auckland was that, of the late Mr. Williamson, who was a consenting party to the financial compact of 1850, which placed £45,000 in his hands for appropriation, being the refund of Auckland’s payment on account of the New Zealand Company’s debt. This was the price of “the birthright of Auckland.” And we must say that the late Superintendent of Auckland was always “loyal to “ the compact of I 860.” He has declared over and over again in the House, and out of it, that ho would never be a party to unsettling that financial arrangement. Why should he ? It was the beginning, middle, and ending of his political existence. He was consistent ;—a man of principle, who stood manfully by his acts, whether right or wrong. But what of this new political light which has risen in Auckland 2 Is it a meteor or a fixed star 2 Shall we compare it to the pole star, unalterable and unfailing in its lustre, a sure guide in the tempest and night, or to one of those “ wandering stars, to which is reserved “the blackness of darkness for ever 1” Who shall say 2 We judge not ; but we shall follow the track of Sir George Grey’s political orbit for a little space, and see how he stands in relation to the land question, out of which he has made so much political capital. Sir George Grey says ho has had £IO,OOO of Imperial money, and if we are to accept his own statement of its roproductiveness, .the leaven hid in a measure of meal in the parable was only a slight sensation to it. If the ten thousand pounds in question did not extinguish the whole Native title to the islands of New Zealand it very nearly did so. But then, Sir George is an Irishman, and in his case “ very nearly” may mean anything or nothing. Wo take it soberly to mean something. Now, what was this something 2 What did Sir George Grey buy with the £IO,OOO of which he speaks, and where is the estate 2 Wo do not insinuate that ho did not buy land, as ho says he did; we only want to know where the land is. Wo have searched the records diligently but cannot find any trace of it. But we shall tell the Auckland electorate what we have found. And wo trust our Auckland contemporaries, who write so glibly but know so little of the land question, will attend to what we say. In 3.853, when the Constitution Act was brought into operation, £208,370 15s. was charged against the Crown lands of the colony, in liquidation of the New Zealand Company’s debt, and section 74 of the Constitution Act appropriated onefourth of all land sales in its liquidation. This included Auckland, although there was reason in her case for disputing the equity of the allocation. However, it was law, and Auckland paid £45,000 on that head up to 1850. In addition to this sum of £45,000 paid for the New Zealand Company’s fourths and interest, out of the territorial revenue of Auckland, between the Ist of January, 1853, and June, 1850, amounting to £155,558, the province of Auckland contributed £40,839 for the purchase of native lands, of which only £32,205 was spent within its borders. Hero is a sum abstracted from the revenue of Auckland province which, if it had been put out at interest twenty years ago, would now bo sufficient to pay for the “education” of the whole of that province for several years to come, on the existing scale, but Sir George Grey’s £IO,OOO does not appear to have had anything to do with it. Furthermore, and by way of illustration, wo may add that of the sum of £92,002 paid by the Governor for native lands during the same period, £43,800 was expended in Wellington, whose total land revenue was £14,579.

Perhaps Sir George Grey will explain these anomalies. The financial arrangement of 1856 was declared to be an adjustment of the public liabilities on account of land. We need not recapitulate its terms. , These are well known to all public men. So far as the North Island is concerned the terms were unfavorable, but the Auckland Superintendent and majority, tempted by the bait of £45,000 refund of their own money, bartered away their interest in the colonial land revenue. It was a foolish bargain no doubt, and one which never could have been possible but for the narrow jobbing spirit of provincialism. However, it was completed. The “compact” was made in 1850, and two years later it was ratified by law.

How does Sir George Grey propose to alter this state of facta '? He has proposed nothing practical. He has declared that the Imperial statutes, under which this has been done, are illegal, but then no one pays any attention to such extravagance. The amusing part of the whole affair is, that while Sir George Grey was Governor, he was himself, as representative of his Sovereign, a party to legislation which he now declares to be illegal. Was he then simply desirous of pleasing his Responsible Advisers and the Colonial Office, which he now declares to be the sole study of a constitutional Governor 1 If so, let us ask the Auckland electorate, what faith can be placed on the sincerity of their new leader; and if it be not so, what are they to expect from his judgment 1 Meanwhile, wo are really solicitous to know where the land is situate which Sir George Grey bought with that Parliamentary grant of £IO,OOO. Perhaps he could tell us whereabouts, in the records of the colonj', the details are to be found.