SPECIAL GENERAL MEETING OF THE SOCIETY OF LAND-PURCHASERS.

Lyttelton Times, Volume I, Issue 25, 28 June 1851, Page 5

SPECIAL GENERAL MEETING OF THE SOCIETY OF LAND-PURCHASERS.

A Special General Meeting of Land-purchasers "was held in the Land-Office, Christehurch, on Wednesday last, the 25th inst. Mr. Brittan, in taking the chair, as president of the Society, referred with the deepest sorrow to the report of the loss by drowning of the Messrs. "Ward, and expressed his confidence that should the report prove true, they would be universally and sincerely regretted. He (Mr. Brittan)read the requisition in pursuance of which the meeting was called, and detailed the circumstances which led to the resignation of nine members of the Council, himself among the number. He particularly referred to Mr. Godley's expressed determination to consult "the society on all matters connected with their interests, and to his (Mr. Godley's) letter of the 18th April last to the council, in which he stated that lie had found it necessary to change the Association's legal adviser in thiscolony. The Council had considered this letter, and passed a resolution, that, without expressing any opinion on the conduct of Mr. Dampier, as that legal adviser, they approved of Mr. Godley's proceeding. At the next following meeting, Mr. Dampier required that the minutes of the resolution referred to should be rescinded, and threatened Mr. Bvittan with an action at law for libel, if he confirmed them by his signature. The sense of that meeting was taken upon the question thus raised, and the confirmation of the minutes, as they then stood, allowed, with only one contrary vote, in consequence of which Mr. Brittan affixed his signature. At a subsequent meeting of the Council, held in Lyttelton on the 9th June, Mr. Dampier opposed the confirmation of the minutes of the previous meeting, on the ground that the alleged libel on his

professional character was continued by them. The opinion of the council was again taken, and these minutes also confirmed. Mr. Dampier then expressed his determination to take immediate steps against Mr. Brittan and Mr. Fitzgerald, as the authors of the libel upon him. Matters being come to this crisis, it was impossible that these members could sit in the council with Mr. Dampier, and therefore either his resignation or theirs must follow. Mr. Dampier having determined not to give up his seat in the council, eight members, viz., Messrs. Brittan, Burke, Wortley, Fitzgerald, Longden, Russell, Tancred, and Townsend, tendered their resignations at the close of the same meeting, Mr. Ward sending in his resignation subsequently. These withdrawals, with the previous one of Mr. Deans, reduced the ,council below a quorum, and therefore it was necessary to call the present meeting to take measures for the election of a new council.

Mr. Alport regretted the turn affairs had taken. It was scarcely necessaTy to remind the meeting that unanimity was the bond of strength. But the chief cause of his regret was the danger to the sacred cause of representative institutions for the colony, that would arise from these collusions in the council. They must remember that their every proceeding was narrowly watched by the Home Government, to observe.its bearings upon the great question of the right and ability of the colonies to legislate for and among themselves. He considered that it would have been no more than an act of delicacy had Mr. Dampier resigned, and so obviated the necessity of the majority of the council withdrawing themselves. He should therefore propose the following resolutions: — 1. That nine members of the council having tendered their resignations, those resignations should be accepted. 2. That the council being thus below a quorum, all the seats should be considered vacant, and a new council be elected. 3. That this election should take place on the 10th of July next. 4. That the Ordinary General Meeting to be held on the 3rd of July, should be postponed until the 10th of that month. Mr. Templar and Mr. Packer respectively suggested that the meeting should be made more fully acquainted with the circumstances of the case, by the letters and minutes connected with it being read. This was done, by which it further appeared that Mr. Godley having expressed his intention to put the purchasers of land in possession of their conveyances without the aid and intervention of a professional man, thus subjecting them, to a merely nominal charge, for parchment, &c, Mr. Dampier had an interview with him upon the subject, in which he threatened the Association with an action before the Supreme Court, should such a course be adopted. Mr. Godley thought it his duty therefore to take the best legal advice he could obtain upon this point, and although the Act of Incorporation of the Association afforded good grounds for supposing that the employment of a professional man for the purpose of conveying the lands was not indispensible, yet, considering the ruinous penalties involved, he effected an arrangement with a solicitor for the transfer of land at 10s. for each conveyance, and had no course before him but to remove Mr. Dampier from the position he had held. A differencebetween Mr. Dampier and the Association respecting the road from the Ferry to Christchurch, and Mr. Dampier's conduct at the sale of town land on April 16th, with reference to his alleged right to some sections in Lyttelton at the upset price,also came under the notice of the meeting.

Mr. Dampier, in reply to these statements, animadverted upon the application in Mr. Godley's letter of April 18, of the term "situation" to his position as legal adviser of the Association, and drew a distinction between a professional man acting for his client, and a person holding a situation. He affirmed that the backbone of the charges against him really was, that the Association had made a gross blunder in laying out the road between, the Ferry and Christchurch, and he had dared to challenge this, and bring it to light. That the road had so far deviated from the course laid down as to reduce the fifty acre section for which he had contracted, and which abutted on that road, to forty seven acres. It was his opposition to this, that was the true cause of offence. He /would also refer to the matter of the town sections which he had claimed at the upset price of ,£l2. When he left England, it had not only been under the impression that his services would be accepted as the Association's solicitor, but also that the sections of town land would be sold at fixed prices. He therefore had applied on arrival here for a squatting license, with a view to purchase the sections on which ho had set himself down, at such fixed prices. He found with surprise, therefore, in April kst, that'the sections were to be put up to auction and sold to the highest bidder, and in complaining against what he considered as unfair and nnjust it was, that he had excited the indignation of the Association's agent here. Mr. Fitzgerald said that the statement as to fixed prices for sections was not the fact Mr. Brittan referred to the Act of Parliament,

the tenor of which was contrary to what Mr. Dampier had assumed. Mr. Dampier replied that the Act was passed Aug. 17, while he had left England on the Ist of July. He would refer again to the case of the road having been made through 'the most valuable part, of his fifty-acre section. He had suggested, on Mr. Cass's proposition, that Mr. Mountfort should remove his boundaries further along the river, to enable him (Mr. Dampier) to get his full fifty acres. Mr. Godley interfered in this, and declared that he ■would allow no deviation from the plan. He had written to Mr. Godley on the subject, and had an interview with Mr. Cass, who had admitted that the road had diverged from the original plan. Finally, he had written to Mr. Brittan suggesting arbitration. But all the justice he could get was an offer to allow him to choose any other block of fifty acres from the unsold land in the settlement. And it was for thus advocating his own rights that he had been stigmatised as a robber, a remover of his neighbour's landmarks, by the entries upon the Minute-Book of the Council. But the meeting might learn from this the danger of having divided interests ia the Council, and admitting the supporters of the Association into their counsels.

Mr. Fitzgerald said, that lie would pass over the opening remarks of Mr. Dampier, but lie could not help referring to his insinuation as to antagonistic interests in the council, by way of shewing its utter absurdity. No one knew better than Mr. Dampier the willingness of Mr. Godley at all times to consult with the council upon all important subjects connected with the interests of the land-pur-chasers. Mr. Dampier had objected strongly to the presence of the paid officers of the Association in the council, how was it that he, a paid officer, had accepted a seat iii that council 1 Mr. Alport had asked them to do what was best to be done under the circumstances, to elect an entirely new council. Every one might then vote as he felt disposed, and this discussion would tend to inform them who •were trustworthy men. But it must not be supposed they had courted this debate, it had been forced upon them by Mr. Dampier's proceedings. It was not so much the advice given by Mr. Dampier that had caused these differences, but the manner in •which that advice had been given. Mr. Dampier, in cautioning Mr. Godley against dispensing with a solicitor to execute conveyances of land, had complained in no very measured terms that it was " taking the bread out of his mouth." It was plain, then, that he was not seeking the interest of the colonists, but his own, and was therefore acting directly in opposition to the Association and their agent, who had desired to save expence to the landpurchasers. This would have been, to say the least, unprofessional, if it had been for a third party, but none were interested in these conveyances being drawn up by a solicitor, but Mr, Dampier himself. With respect to the Heatlicote road, it was wellknown that the Association had reserved to themselves the right of altering the plans they had laid down, should it be requisite, by a clause in the terms of purchase. Mr. Dampier had attempted to explain his conduct with respect to the town sections, but it still looked like an attempt to obtain sections at less than their marketable value. Mr. Dampier had requested Mr. Alport to keep his claim secret till the sale took place, but Mr. Alport had very properly informed Mr. Godley, who could of course only act as he had acted in the matter. As regarded the threatened action, also, it was oue in "which the whole body of colonists were interested, for the Association had no private interests to serve, but were merely the trustees for the funds of the settlement, therefore any action brought against them was neither less nor more than an action against the roads and other public works of the colony. The right to thousands of acres had been settled in the colony without the slightest approach to litigation, and yet with one man this collusion had entirely originated. He was anxious that the society should not be deprived of the further and valuable services of Mr. iJrittan, who had acted in this business, and on every occasion, most wisely; he was also anxious that the society should not give the control over the land funds which had been so courteously accorded them to any but to those who could not be accused ol" inconsistency—to men not crooked in their ways.

Mr. Perceyal seconded the motion of Mr. Alport.

Mr. Evans objected to the election taking place at the next general meeting, as the requisite fortnight's notice could not be given by candidates.

Mr. Biuttan said there was nothing to prevent that meeting from adjourning to the 10th July, which would leave a fortnight for notice.

Mr. Templar was of opinion that the society had'no right to deal with Mr. Dam pier's private character.

The resolutions moved by Mr. Alport were then put to the meeting, which divided, shewing 28 members in favour of the resolutions; 10 others, who were present, refused to vote. Mb. Bridge gave notice that he should at the next general meeting move an amendment in the rules,'that no officer of the Association should be eligible to sit in the Council.

The meeting then separated,