MR. McCASKILL AND COMPENSATION.

Daily Southern Cross, Volume XXIII, Issue 3119, 16 July 1867, Page 4

MR. McCASKILL AND COMPENSATION.

To the Editor of the Daily Southern C*oss. gHij The following letter I addressed to John Williamson, Esq., Superintendent of Auckland : — " Sir,— T beg to remind your Honor of a conversation I had with you on the compensation subject. On that occasion you distinctly said that I should receive some compensation for my losses, and requested me to give you my opinion ag to what I deemed the best mode of settling those compensation claims so as that they, in their payment, should fall as lightly as possible on the Treasury, and at the same time give satisfaction to the claimants. This request I complied with by letter. You, sir, stated that there was a sum of £60,000 or £70,000 set apart by the General Government for the express purpose of settling these compemation claims, adding these words : ' You will get your share of thai.' I replied that ' I was not sure what I was to get, or if I was to get anything at all, as Beckham had not, ao far as I knew, made any award in my case, for I had not heard a word on the subject from his Court.' You, sir, then used these very words : ' Yes, you will get it; but money is scarce just now.' 'So I hear,' said Ij 'your Treasury sounds hollow.' 'Yes,' you replied, * 'tis a beggarly account of empty boxes, but you will get your share, write me your ideas on the subject.' I did so ; but to this day I have not received the value of the ink I wasted on that writing from the Government. May I «sk why it is that I have been denied any compensation whatever? You, sir, must be well aware that the Thames, up which river my farm lies, was blockaded, and that very considerable apprehensions were entertained in Auckland of the probability of its being attacked by the Thames natives. Bat I need not dilate on the danger apprehended in town, or on the extraordinary oonduot of '

the provincial authorities of Auckland as 'exhibited in this compensation juggle. All these are known to yoa, sir, better perhaps than to me. I will allude to Judge Beckham's conduct no further than to lay that, having the power to act his will, he did so. But power is not always equity, and too often it is not justice, and sometimes it is neither, but the very opposite of both. I should not have troubled you with this letter if I knew why I have been denied any compensation whatever, or how you, sir, came to say that I was to receive compensation for my losses, when the fact is that I never got one peony. This letter may appear in print here — certainly it shall in England; and X cannot suppose it will reflect more lustre or honour on the rulers of this miserably mismanaged province of Auckland, than our railroad does on its wise and patriotic |projectors, or the plight in which Fred. Whitaker has left us manifests the profundity of wisdom and gubernatorial talent of that mighty mind. I beg respectfully to be informed why It is that I have Jbeen denied compensation for my losses caused by the outbreak among the natives. — I am, &o»| " DONALD MOCASKII.L." To this letter I received the following reply— 'tis no answer : — " Superintendent's Office, "Auckland, June 25, 1867. " Sir, — I have been directed by his Honor the Superintendent to acknowledge the receipt of your communication of date 11th inst., and to inform you that it is couched in such language as to be inadmissible on the records of the province. — I have, &c. , . "J, A. CfILFILLAN, "Secretary." Well, I expected nothing, and got it, with a touch of " wounded dignity." I wrote again as follows : — " Sir, — I have just received your answer to mine of the 11th inst., and beg to say that I look on it as a mere evasion of the question I asked, and by no means such an answer as I expected from a gentleman in your position, and oE your standing in society. Whatever my 'language' may be, or has beeD, it is unworthy the man in power to make the wording of a ' communication' an excuse for declining the information requested of him ; and particularly so, when the man in power is a paid public servant, deriving all his dignity and authority solely from the people — consequently bound to pay attention to the grievances of the people who pay him. It would have been far more dignified on your Honor's part to have said at once, as Beckham's clerk said to me, 'Don't bother Mr. Beckham— go away,' than to tell me one day 'You will receive compensation ;' and, when I ask the reason why I have not received (as I now again do), to be told, as your Honor's letter plainly indicates, that I shall not receive that information unless I beg for it in some officially-prescribed form. Of that form lam totally ignorant. Whether my letters are, or are not, fit to be placed among the reqords of the province, is to me a matter of perfect indifference. I am sorry that necessity compels me to write them; for, if I were alone — without a family — or had I the means of removing myself and family from this disgracefully mismanaged country, I would do so at once and for ever, and not remain in a country ruled by men whose self-interest is ' their sole guide ; who have steeped it in debt and misery ; whose honour is not to be relied on ; whose olass-legislation and partizanship }have driven, and are still driving, away the men whom they had enticed to come here by promiies that never were intended to be honestly fulfilled ; and now have brought almost utter ruin— bankruptcy, not of cash, merely, but of public honesty— on the province, and on a great portion of the people as well. Sir, I was told, before I ever lodged a claim for compensation for my losses, that I was a 'marked man;' that, 'whoever would get compensation, I never would get a farthing;' 'the Government is resolved on making an example of you ;' ' you need not apply for compensation — you will never get a farthing.' These and similar remarks were addressed to me before I lodged my claim in Beckham's Court. And am I not warranted by what the fact is to believe that those who thus spoke to me were aware of what the authorities had pre-deter-mined to do in my case ? I am. And am Ito be told that I am not to speak out — to tell the truth— to call things by their right names ? Or do you, sir, mean to tell me that, because I write indignantly of the treatment I have met with, therefore the wrong or injustice I have met with at the hands of Auckland's officials shall not be redressed ? This is ' a new way for paying old debts,' certainly, and an economical way also. Whether it is an honest way is a different thing, First, refuse me that reparation of my losses which has been accorded to bankers, members of Council,ofncials,and their friends ; and when I remind you of yonr own c language,' your Honor stands on your ' dignity,' and actually refuses to answer a plain, simple question J However, 'my necessities ' are so great and pressing, that I am willing to make any apology your Honor may be pleased to prescribe, for I can candidly and honestly say that I did not, nor do I now, mean or intend to show any wunt of respect for your Honor ; but, being accustomed for thirty years of my life to move among and hold intercourse with gentlemen who meant whatever they said, and said what they really meant, I acquired that habit, and hope I never shall IoS9 it; though it is quite evident it will never gain any encouragement in Auckland — certainly not from its officials and land-sharks — until the present generation has passed away. That habit is, to tell the truth. Had our rulers, legislators, and officials always acted on my habit or rule, we Bhould in all human probability have fewer bankrupts among us ; and most assuredly have more prosperity and more people to enjoy it than we now have, or are likely to have for years to come. I again respectfully request your Honor will be pleased to inform me why it is that I have been denied compensation for my losses, caused by the war with the natives. — I have the honour to be your Honor's obedient servant." Donald McCaskill.