New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) SATURDAY, OCTOBER 16.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4547, 16 October 1875, Page 2

New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) SATURDAY, OCTOBER 16.

The report of the committee appointed to inquire into the circumstances attending the sale of the Piako-Waikato swamp-land to Mr. Thomas Russell was brought up yesterday. We have not had an opportunity of reading the minutes of evidence, which were ordered to be printed, but we print the report itself in another column. What must strike everyone on reading thisreport is the conspicuous absence of any paragraph sustaining the allegations that were made in the House, of corrupt dealing with these swamp lands, by the Government.: The utmost that is alleged ia that an irregularity was committed. We do not stand up in defence of any departure from the strict letter of the law, in the administration, of the public estate, by Ministers; but having said so much, we must add that the sweeping accusations brought against the Government are not sustained by the report. The bargain appears to have been a fair one as between the Government and Mr. Russell; the mode of conducting the transaction is the only feature open to objection. The land is not of good quality, but the Government did not take the. precaution of having a report' from a competent officer, before concluding the agreement with Mr. Russell. This was an error. It was the greater error committed, inasmuch as the two highest officers of the Government in Auckland, recommended that a report upon the quality of the land, and its capability for improvement by drainage, should be obtained before the sale was concluded. We refer to Dr. Pollen, now Premier, and Mr. Heale, inspector; of surveys. Most fortunate, we say, under these circumstances, that the quality of the land has been proved to be inferior, otherwise the worst possible construction might have been put upon what was an oversight. But the truth is that the quality of the land was well known to the parties to the contract, and so far as they were concerned a report of the character stated would have been a mere matter of form. Mr. Russell knew what he was buying, and its present and prospective value; and the Native Minister was quite as well informed on both points. The consequence is, as reported by the committee, that the terms of the arrangement are not unfavorable to the public. Barring the irregularity, therefore, in making a private sale, the arrangement with Mr. Russell was a good one for the public. We have the public bearings of this question also to consider. This immense tract of country, if left unimproved, would check the extension of settlement from the delta of the Waikato towards the Thames and Piako valleys. It lies, moreover, on the outskirts of our confiscated territory, and should not he left unoccupied, if possible. Hence, on public grounds, there was every.reason why the Government should accept any reasonable proposal for utilising this swampland. Such a proposal was made by Mr. Russell, (after the lapse of years during which no one came forward to select it,) on the conditions stated in the report. The Government, acting for the best, agreed to those conditions, and by so doing laid themselves open to the accusations that have been so freely,* and as the .event proves, so unjustly made against them; The land was practically withdrawn from

public competition by this private contract to soil, and to that extent the Government are censurable. On the other hand, it is only fair to look at the other side of the question. An opportunity presented itself for promoting settlement, and consolidating the authority of the Government in this borderland, which might not offer aqain, and the Government evidently made up their mind to risk the censure of the House rather than miss the occasion. Doubtless this was done after due consideration, and as it was admittedly wrong they have received their chastisement. But neither does that prevent us looking at the general merits of the question. Setting aside the departure from the strict letter of the law in this particular instance, what do we find 1 Why, this : that the Government, by the terms of their agreement with Mr. Russell, anticipated the policy of the Legislature in respect of native lands. One of the conditions of sale is that half the purchase money should be spent on forming a road across the swamp, twentyfive miles in length, which, when completed, the committee report will be of great public utility. What is this but applying the principle of “ localising the “ land revenue,” which was advocated so energetically by men who imputed all manner of nastiness and corruption to the Government for doing the very thing which they declared to be essential to the well-being and good government of the country ? Mr. Russell conditioned with the Government to “return the land “ fund to the district in which it was “ raised, in the shape of roads, bridges, “ and other public works.” The method may not have been quite regular. Sir George Grey, and other members, say it was not; but then these same gentlemen say that the Abolition of Provinces Bill, by which the laud revenue of the provinces is “ localised,” is likewise irregular. While holding to the principle, they object to its application. , Granting the irregularity, the country will look at the public gain, and, considering its magnitude in either case, will condone the offence. The committee rejoice.that the Government propose to bring the confiscated lands under the ordinary land laws of the provinces in which they are situate, and a Bill for that purpose is before the House. And we go with the committee in this matter. But what then ? __ Why simply this, that under the Abolition of Provinces Bill the disposition of the Piako swamp purchase ’ money will form a precedent for future guidance. The purchase money will be returned to the district In the shape of roads and bridges. A word more in conclusion. ; We are of opinion that Mr. Russell thought he was making a good bargain with the Government. - He looked to the future to recoup him for a large present outlay in extensive drainage works. The Government, on the other hand, - thought they were making a good bargain. They looked to the present;—to the importance of settling the district, by attaching to it capital and labor, so ps to drain and render habitable a waste territory of swamp land and stagnant pools, but which might, by the expenditure of money, be covered by pleasant homesteads in the occupation of a prosperous and contented people. Prom either point of view the bargain was a perfectly fair one. A large sum of money has been already expended; if the title to the land be confirmed, a much larger outlay must be gone to to render secure and profitable what has been already spent. Mr. Russell, and his partners in this undertaking, will ultimately reap the reward of their enterprise; but the Government, and the country at large, will be gainers from first to last. Labor is employed, settlement is encouraged, the producing powers of the country _ are developed, the land fund is localised, and least of all,. the Government are censured by a select committee for attaining these results by a departure from the strict letter of the law. 'Well, we do not defend them "for doing' so. It ”was~wrong, no doubt, to depart from the _ requirements of the law ; but it was, right, beyond question, to extend settlement from the Upper Waikato towards the Piako, and to reclaim some eighty thousand acres of desolate swamp, making it fit for the habitation of man. We have stated the case fairly, and leave the country to judge. : ,