MANAWATU LAND CLAIMS.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 5182, 31 October 1877, Page 3

MANAWATU LAND CLAIMS.

TO THE EDITOR OP THE NEW ZEALAND TIMES. Sut, —I was not a little surprised at the opinion expressed by some of the members of Parliament relative to the claims of the holders of the Manawatu land orders. It is an old saw, that truth is stranger than fiction ; and I am sure that the manner in which the holders of these land orders have been treated will hardly be credited. 1. In 1839 they each gave the New Zealand Company £IOO, ostensibly for 100 acres of land. They might have, selected their sections at the Hntt, or elsewhere ; but were induced to prefer the Manawatu from the glowing descriptions given of that country by Mr, Kettle, survej or, and other officers of the company. An investigation into tho company’s title was made by the Government land commissioner, Mr Spain, and their title was said to be incomplete. By this time all the available land at the Hutt and elsewhere had been selected, and the Manawatu laud holders would have to have taken inferior laud, although holding early choices of selection, if they had decided to select elsewhere. The company, however, said that

■ j ■\ * ’ . ’ *: i .1, 1 - !| ■■■ V, they , would!, make good their" title ana the landholders, placed implieib jaith, in,their, promise. The company, however, transferred all their rights'and interests in New Zealand; to the British Government, and that; Govern-; ment ■ undertook to fulfil all the company's engagements. But how has it done sb ? Thirty - eight' years ago : , these landholders trusted the company with their money ; thirtyfour years ago the Government undertook to see them righted ; and up to the present day these poor people have been kept out of possession of their land, and cannot obtain either land or money. The Parliamentary committee proposed to give them £3 an acre as compensation ; but eveu' this small pittance has been objected to by some members as too much, and one member proposed to reduce it to £2. I would ask those members how they would like such treatment themselves? Compare the present position of those landholders who selected at* the Manawatu (although possessing earlier choices) with " those who selected in the Hutt. The latter have been in the beneficial occupation of the land for 36 years, and their land in many instances is now worth move than £IOO per acre. The former have been kept out of their land for the same period, aud instead of being put in quiet possession, are about to be offered the miserable pittance of £2 per acre. The Parliament of New Zealand, by special Acts, have assured the landholders of quiet possession of the desired land ; but, by subsequent proceedings, they have put it out of their power to do so : and now, forsooth, they are about to commit an act of spoliation. A £IOO lent for 38 years at 10 per cent, compound interest would amount to a very large sum. This money has been used for the colonisation of the country, and it is a crying shame and disgrace that the parties who advanced the money should be so cruelly treated. Many of the original landholders have been removed from this sublunary state of things, hoping to the last, and thinking that they had left their children an inheritance. But how miserably have their hopes been disappointed, their rights been trampled upon, 'and their just claims neglected. It is to be hoped that this state of things will not be allowed _ much longer to continue, but that a sense of justice, which is implanted in every Briton’s breast, will impel our senators to see that right is done.—l am., &c. Veritas.