22

"With hostile chiefs and tribe at Porirua, would not the Government of which you speak have been confined in its operations to the Hutt districts ? 1 think not. I think it might readily have been extended to the Wairaiapa, and I know of no hostility from the natives to the whites anywhere in the neighbourhood of Port Nicholson except as such hostility was engendered by the proceedings of the local Government towafds the first settlers whom that Government always regarded with extreme jealousy and dislike, and sought to injure by a variety of means including the most false representations to the natives with regard to mischievous designs of the settlers towards them. In saying all this, lam but repeating what was asserted by the first settlers themselves in every variety of official arid unofficial form. There is a good deal of very authentic information on the subject the inevidence taken,both oral and documentary,by the select committee of the House of Commons in 1844 which I conclude is in the hands of this Committep. Were the directors in the beginning of 1841 aware of the terms upon which the Goverment intended to deal with the private purchases effected prior to the session by the natives of the sovereignty to her Majesty? I cannot recollect exactly, but have no doubt that the fact is ascertainable in the most authentic manner by referring to documents published at or near the time which are probably before the Committee. ' Were the Company acquainted with the proceedings of the Committee of 1840 and the documents produced before that Committee ? Of course they were,but I can only speak in a general way. Does the immediate neighbourhood of Port Nicholson afforded land sufficient to fulfil the terms of the prospectus of the Company for the first and principal settlements? r . rhe land ll >ere is much more hilly than was anticipated, but I think that in spite of that disadvantage, if the Company and first settlers had been fairly allowed to carry out their purpose so far as depended upon themselves and not upon the land, the 1 .nd would, as respects value, have amply given effect to the prospectus of the Company The hills were covered with exceedingly valuable timber; and if the capital of the first and principal sett'ement had been made what it was de signed to be the, owners of land in those hills would soon have recovered their investments at the rate of £1 per acre, and a large profit besides. Moreover when quality Umber mak<s pastoral g round of a valuable Committee adjourned to Wednesday 26th instant, at forty-five minutes past 1" IliD). Wednesday, 26th July Committee met pursuant to adjournmt. b7."Z« H *"' <iD lhe ohai '> *** *"!!. MacMr. King examined by the Chairman. Have yon read through your former evidence ? Yes, and I find it coriect. in your former evidence you spoke of a contest between the Government and Company. What do you mean by that ? vctumeni ana I mean the conflict between the Government and the Company as to the in terpretation of the agreement with Lord John Russell in ] 840 of Jo.2™ """ ,he eVitU "° e Si,e " by Mr ' Wak « ™«u»g Conversation ensued. adoption.^ 0nt ° S ° me re,ol,,tioM he FT™*, but did mt »„ thei, Committee adjourned to 10 o'clock 10-morrow.