THE EAST COAST NATIVE LAND BOARD BILL.

Evening Post, Volume LII, Issue 93, 10 September 1896, Page 4

THE EAST COAST NATIVE LAND BOARD BILL.

The Joint Committee on § Private Bills has prevented a Bill promoted by Mr. Wi Pere from being considered by the House. The formalities required for launching a Private Bill had not been complied with. The Bill was a peculiar one, and sufficient was shown on its face to warrant both enquiry and action by the Ministry. It appears that this Bill deals with the old East Coast Land Company, which was started in 1882, mainly through the exertions of Mr, Rees. The object of the Company was to manage the land of certain natives, and to assist them by money to get their land surveyed and sold for settlement. Many natives handed over about 128,000 acres'tcthe Company. How the Company got into deep waters, how it came to mortgage the natives' land, and what led to it being wound up, have never been satisfactorily explained. The Company went into liquidation, and the shareholders had to pay up the calls on their shares. The natives, however, did not get back their land. It was, as we have said, mortgaged— to the Bank of New Zealand or the Estates Company. The question of these lands came before the Validation Court, and the Judge of that Court appointed a Receiver to manage the whole of the land. This was, we understand, assented to by the natives at the time. The Bill proposed to put an end to this arrangement. The proposal in the Bill was to hand over the administration of the lands concerned to a Board composed of the Hon. Mr. Carroll, Mr. "Wi Pere, Mr. Jackson (the present Receiver), Mr. Tucker, Mr. Townley, and one member to be appointed by the Gover-nor-in-Council. These members were to be paid. The Board was to have very great powers. It could sell, mortgage, and lease the lands. "We have then a proposal — sanctioned, we suppose, by the Ministry — to hand over the control of vast blocks of native lands to this private Board — on which a Minister is to have a seat and be paid for his services. In fact,, it looks as if the Ministry wished to give another Minister a directorship in an Assets Board. Seeing that the lands are under a. Receiver and the control of a Court with very large powers, the Bill was an extraordinary one. If the Receiver has not sufficient powers to administer the estate, the proper and safe thing to do would be to associate the Public Trust Office with the Receiver. Itis to be hoped we have heard the last of this Bill and of this Board. It is known that on the East Coast -many native estates have bpen grossly mismanaged. "We Relieve the land of the natives now under the very capable control of Mr. Jackson, the Receiver, will be carefully managed. We dislike the proposed Board, and ' trust the Ministry will take steps to investigate the position of the blocks or get the Receiver to report on the land, and if there is lack of control, or mismanagement, then it is the duty of the Ministry to submit the matter to the consideration of Parliament. AYe have, we suppose, heard the last of the Board Bill, but have we heard the last about the management of East Coast lands?