Poverty Bay Standard. PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY, THURSDAY AND SATURDAY MORNINGS. GISBORNE SATURDAY, JULY 28, 1883.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume XI, Issue 1335, 28 July 1883, Page 2

Poverty Bay Standard. PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY, THURSDAY AND SATURDAY MORNINGS. GISBORNE SATURDAY, JULY 28, 1883.

jjx Thursday night’s telegrams we we re informed, under the heading of <<2Ltthem again,” that Mr DeLau* tour, secretary to the Now Zealand Native Land Settlement Company, and holder of 500 shares in the same, moved for a return “showing the <> several blocks of Native lauds, 11 their respective acreage, and the « provincial or registration districts in “ which such blocks are situate, for “ which certificates of title or Crown “ grants have been issued, or are “ ready for issue, by order of the “ Compensation Courts or Native '• Land Courts, in favor of any num- “ ber of owners being ten, or any less “ number, since the Ist day of Janu- “ 1866 distinguishing between the « certificates of grants made under “ each of such Acts, and giving the “ number of persons found by either “ of the Courts aforesaid to be inter- “ ested in the case of each block of “ land, a return to shew in what cases “ any restriction upon alienation other “ than by lease was imposed, and the “ nature of such restriction, and also “ to give the names of the persons « placed in the certificates or grants “ as the owners. He said the infor- " mation was required to prevent the “ Natives being plundered. Does Mr DeLautbor suppose for one moment that the Ministry did not see through this “ creeping ” attempt to prostitute his position in the House to the Company’s benefit. He said “ the information was required to prevent the Natives being plundered! This is, undobtedly, as great a falsehood as that which he uttered when he stated that the purchasing clause in his sorry Bill “ crept in by mistake.” We can scarcely understand how it is that Mr DeLautour, who is so eminently fitted to do the dirty work of this notorious Company, so constantly fails in his endeavors. Major Atkinson knew perfectly that this return asked for “ to prevent the Natives being robbed,” was neither more or less than an artfully devised

plan on the part of the Company’s secretary to utilise his position in the House to obtain for the Company the names and titles of all buyers, owners and persons interested in blocks of land since 1866 up to the present time. It is easy to see of what immense advantage such a return, which Major Atkinson said would require “ six clerks for two years ” to prepare would be to the Company. The Company could, upon getting this return, “ to prevent the Natives being plundered (?) —dispense entirely with their large and expensive army of touts, and go direct to the owners and parties interested in blocks of land ; whereas now they often find it absolutely impossible to find the proper individuals to deal with. It would also save the Company many thousands of pounds in fees, &c., which must be paid before any of this necessary information can be obtained. Again, we thank Major Atkinson for extinguishing this attempted fraud on the country. The sooner the time arrives for Mr DeLautour to carry his brilliant abilities into the obscurity of private life, where, no doubt, his peculiar knack of telling the truth (?) will stand him in good stead, the better it will be for the country.