Poverty Bay Standard. PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. THURSDAY, AUGUST 17, 1882.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume X, Issue 1125, 17 August 1882, Page 2

Poverty Bay Standard. PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. THURSDAY, AUGUST 17, 1882.

The irrepressible Captain Tucker is At it again ! On this occasion his spleen i* directed against the Cock County Council, on whom he induced the Borough Council, at its last meeting, to practically pass a vote of censure for venturing to disagree with his little designs in Native land matters. Some time ago the Borough Council thought fit to discuss the provisions of the Native Lands Division Bill laid before Parliament by the Hon. John Bryce.

Capt. Tucker, who, it appears, arrogates to himself in the Borough Council the position of “ guide, philosopher and. friend,” especially where Native land matters are concerned, cavilled at the Bill, and by the fatal eloquence of his “too too” persuasive tongue, induced the Council to commit itself to a resolution on the matter, to be submitted to Mr. Allan McDonald, M.H.R., doubtless for presentation to the Government. The objections raised by Capt. Tucker to the Bill were mainly these : Firstly, that a person holding a mortgage over a block of land should not have the power of vetoing a subdivision. Capt. Tucker, doubtless in ignorance, has overlooked the provision made by the responsible author of the Bill against any such contingency by Clause 4, Sub-section 7, which empowers the Native Lands Court to proceed with the sub-division in the event of a mortgagee refusing to do so. That point, therefore, is disposed of without the intervention of the august body which Capt. Tuckeb honors by his membership. The next point raised by the same astute gentleman is, that when surrendering a Crown grant for a block of land prior to the issue of new certificates for the different subdivided portions, the assent of the whole of the grantees should be first obtained. A.re visions about ? Or do we recognise the graceful outlines of the New Zealand Land Settlement Company looming in the unfathomable future of Capt. Tucker's mind ? Do our readers comprehend what Captain Tucker's meaning is ? It is this: that if ever it became law, and Capt Tucker could by any possible means obtain uncontrolled power over a single grantee in any of the numerous blocks of land in this district, such blocks could not he sub-divided, the Crown grants surrendered, and new grants issued, until the assent of such grantee, practically, in such a case, Captain Tucker himself, were first obtained. Many of the Cook County Councillors who have given a vast amount of attention to this subject, resolutely set their faces against Capt, Tucker's views, and in a letter to the Native Minister communicated their opinion of those views. How the Cook County Council will survive the terrible censure passed upon them last Tuesday night, is a matter for wonderful speculation. We do not for a single moment believe that either that body or the Native Minister are likely to be much terrified or misled by any Machiavellian trioks of the Tuckerian class, Mr. Bbtck recognises in the fullest degree the difficulties surrounding the question of land titles along the East Coast. On the seconding reading of the Bill, in referring to the various complications that have arisen in respect to Native lands, he said, “ There are other diffl. “ culties which the Bill is devised to “ meet, for, as if titles were not suffi- “ ciently complicated under the Native “ Lands Court Aot, other Acts have “ been passed, such as the Poverty Bay “Land Act, which have led to compli- “ cations on complications. In fact 11 the difficulty of ascertaining title on " the East Coast is really a disgrace “to any community that pretends to “ have civilised laws." Here then having shewn what to our mind ap. pears to be the true solution of Capt, Tucker’s motion in the Borough Council, we pause for the result of this fresh attempt in the nearly worn-out business of “ axes to grind.”