A.—4.

has ever owned in New Zealand has been obtained by purchase from Native owners, or by escheat, or from surplus lands, which did not occur in Webster's case. In the Piako case (305k), the Crown had actually to purchase land from the Natives to make up the amount awarded to Webster by the second Commission.* The claim of Mr. Webster cannot, therefore, in any event, be against the Government—it must be against the Native owners; and the utmost he could claim would be the passing of a statute to enable him to prosecute his claims against the Native owners. As I again repeat, the Natives remained the possessors of lands not awarded to claimants; the Government did not seize nor sell them. How possibly, then, can the Government be under any liability to Mr. Webster ? 12. I have not dealt seriatim with all the statements in the report, because I imagine that the Home Government is now seized of the facts, and can sufficiently reply to them. I make these remarks so that it may not be assumed that there are not many further paragraphs in the report that may not be questioned. The large question as to whether, for example, Mr. Webster's claim is barred by previous treaties or agreements between the Imperial Government and the Government of the United States, is a question which I do not think it necessary for me to enter upon. They can be better dealt with by the Law Advisers of the Crown in Britain. 13. It will be noticed that the report concludes with suggesting that, if the Government of Great Britain refuses to consider Mr. Webster's claims for reparation, " special reprisals " should be resorted to. lam not aware whether it is usual, in a document asking for the consideration of claims of a citizen, to threaten the Government to which such a document is addressed in such a manner. In private society, in a civilised State, it is not usual to threaten your antagonist with revolvers and bowie knives, or even to statethat there will be an appeal to a judicial tribunal if your arguments are not listened to; and I would respectfully submit that this threat of reprisals shows weakness on the part of the Committee. 14. I may state here that, so far as the Government of New Zealand is concerned, whatever party or Ministry have been in power, the citizens of the United States and the Government of the United States have always been treated with the greatest respect and consideration —with as much respect and consideration as the citizens of England, or the Home Government of the Empire. Even now, New Zealand is maintaining, with really very little aid from the American Government, a steam-service between New Zealand and San Francisco ; and the imports to New Zealand from the United States far exceed our exports to that country. There has also of late years been growing up a strong bond of amity between New Zealand and the United States. I do not suppose that any report of the Committee of the Senate is likely to prevent the growth of such friendly feelings. Dunedin, 18th April, 1893. Eobert Stout.

* See Appendix A hereto, p. 20, the note marked (6) in last column of table.

8