Poverty Bay Standard. Published Every Wednesday & Saturday WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1881.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume IX, Issue 920, 23 February 1881, Page 3

Poverty Bay Standard.

Published Every Wednesday & Saturday WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1881.

“ We shall sell to no man Justice or Right “ We shall deny to no man Justice or Right; “ we shall defer to no man Justice or Right."

In view of the several important blocks of land in the Poverty Bay District, recently gazetted by the Government as under the Waste Lands Acts, an epitome of which will be found in another column, the opportunity suggests itself as being an appropriate one on which to say a word or two in reference to the proposed alteration and improvement in the constitution of our Waste Lands Boards. We have before remarked on the public spirit and forethought of the Wairoa County Council in initiating this subject for discussion throughout the Colony; and it gives us pleasure to find that an active hearty co-opera-tion is promised to that body, by several County Councils in bringing the question before the Government and the House. The proposal of the Wairoa County Council is, in reference to the constitution of Land Boards, as follows: —

“ That in the opinion of this Council the existing constitution of the Waste Lands Boards should be amended so as to provide for an elective element being represented thereon as well as a nominated one, and that the Government be requested to make provision in future Land Acts, that for each County comprised in a land district the Council of such County may elect one representative on the Board of such land district; and that each County Council be communicated with asking their co-operation and assistance in the matter; (1) by urging the same on the notice of the Government, (2) by petitioning Parliament early next session to give effect to the above, (3) by obtaining the support of members of the House of Representatives,”

With regard to the foregoing, experience has taught us that a change in the building up of the Land Boards is highly desirable, if not absolutely necessary ; and the element of making the members responsible to some one or something seems to suggest itself as a solution of the difficulty. Election would, probably, be a step in the right direction ; but we would propose to go further than the Wairoa Council. We would propose to do away with the nominated element altogether, and make the whole Board elective, except the paid Commissioner appointed by Government; and that ratepayers, duly qualified for election to the Councils themselves, should be eligible for election to a seat at a Land Board, and that they should be elected in like manner by their own people. But while we would throw all the responsibility of choice upon the people themselves, and substitute election for nomination, we must not lose sight of the fact that even that privilege has its attendant dangers, a fact which the supporters of nomineeism are sure to make good use of while the matter is being traversed in the House. It has been objected that the election, and even the nomination of local members to administer the land laws, would be subject to local jealousies, and, possibly, to local abuses. That Boards, composed of settlers who have a direct interest in land settlement, would be susceptible of such local influence as w 7 ould tend to a demoralization of the administration. But, if that be so, what shall be said of nomineeism, and thorough demoralization as exhibited by the Auckland Land Board ? They are all local men, and with an equally direct, but not so legitimate an interest in the result of their works. Their interest lies—and their powers are exerted to the utmost — in endeavoring to obtain a concentration of everything in Auckland. They would not have a pound’s worth of land sold outside Queenstreet, if they could help it. They are city men, very good in their way ; excellent business men, and of private worth ; but they are not free from the accusation of local bias ; while to that may be added a large, almost deplorable, ignorance of the nature, quality and value of the lands they sell. One

of the chief recommendations for the privilege of occupying so responsible a position is a thorough knowledge of the suitability arid adaptability of the various characters or lands to the various purposes of settlement; and who is so likely to make themselves acquainted with these matters as a Board composed of men living on the spot, so to speak, and who have gained their knowledge by personal experience ? But in so far as local influence is concerned, what is there objectionable in that, if the law is properly and actively carried out? The work entailed upon a Land Board—if one is given to each County, as we maintain there should be —is obviously of a local nature ; therefore, it would be a kind of guarantee for fidelity to trust, that men were looking well to their own interests, the more faithfully they served the public. But, if the Counties are to be permitted to deal with the sale of their own lands, the nomination by the Government of members composing the Boards, would lose much of its objectionableness. If the Government and Parliament make the concession of localising the land administration, and give the people more authority over that which concerns them most deeply, the question would be half met already ; for, as we take the proposal of the Wairoa Council, it is not so riiuch that the elective element is insis! ed on, as that the ratepayers may have, atleast, onelocal man to represent them, on the Board, and through whom they can communicate their wishes. An instance in point is that to which we have already drawn attention. Is it likely that a Board of gentlemen sitting in Auckland, will import the same energy towards getting some of the recently gazetted lands into the market, as if we had a Board composed of local men, and whose centre of operations was in Gisborne ? This is one feature which we trust Counties will give their undivided attention to. Let them be united on the question of local administration ; for in that lies the germ of the difference between settlement and non-settlement • let them strain every nerve, and use every argument in setting forth the advantages to be derived, both to Counties, and to the Colony, by a local dispensation of our land government, and the minor question of Election versus Nomination will practically settle itself; nevertheless, if they cannot get the one, they ought, by right, to obtain the other.

The items of mining intelligence we have extracted from the Coromandel Mail (a paper which has just been resuscitated owing to the improved circumstances of the Coromandel goldfield) are indicative of increased activity in the gold-producing power of the field. It would have been more satisfactory if the information had been more complete. Erom our files to hand there is nothing to shew whether the “finds” or “patches” that have been struck are already exhausted, or whether they are leaders that will continue their lead in their present value, with a possibility of leading up to something better. But, when it is considered that arrangements are made for crushing 100 tons of stone from the Tiki claim, the early specimens of which averaged the astounding yield of half an ounce to the pound, one’s breath is almost taken away in attempting to articulate .the figures and fortunes such facts represent. Then, as if to shorten one’s respiratory powers still more, we have it stated that from 140 lbs weight of quartz, 119 ozs of melted gold were extracted, then we have the minor result of 11 oz to the ton, which, although insignificant by the side of the Tiki itself, is, probably, too prodigious, and too good to last. We are glad that the people of Coromandel have held on so manfully, and that the reward of their labors is at hand ; and it affords us pleasure to state that an old settler from Napier, Major Green, is one of the lucky ones, having put his claim into a company valued at £12,000.

Mr. Inspector Scully calls for tenders for constabulary forage ; vide particulars in advertisement.