CORRESPONDENCE.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume II, Issue 55, 17 July 1862, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

To the Kditor of the dlatvlce's Bay Times. Sin, —Could you lind room for the ing questions : —ls the Andrew Hamilton Russell, Esq., who was gazetted as J.P. and M.L.C. some time ago, the same person as leased a Maori run on the South side of the Tutaekuri Liver over the head of another settler some fifteen or eighteen months ago ? Was it the same Andrew Hamilton Russell, Esq., that was latterly gazetted R.M., and afterwards also Civil Commissioner under the precious Maori policy instituted by the peace-at-any-price Ministry ? Was it the same Andrew Hamilton Russell, Esq., as above alluded to, that sat and judged William Colenso on the 23rd ult. ? Was it from his practical experience of law-breaking that he was able to decide so promptly that William Colenso was an offender against the Native Land Purchase Ordinance ? By what process of reasoning, or by what arguments, was it demonstrated so clearly in the eyes of the Court that the Awapuni Mission Station, conveyed, “ with consent of the Crown,” to the Church Mission Society, is still Maori land ? If it were not for fear of being inquisitive, I would like also to know whether the three persons (William Waiupu, &c.) whose names are attached to a published document, have power to decide, either in

their own right, or with the assistance of His High Mightiness Bishop Selwyn, that land conveyed to the Church Mission Society shall revert to the Maories, after a considerable amount of improvement has been made on it by an Englishman occupying it with the consent of the Society ? If they have a right to transfer the property of the Society to the natives, have they also a right to transfer William Coleuso’s property along with that of the Society, without making some compensation to the said William Coleuso ? Perhaps some of your correspondents may be able to reply to some of these. Yours, &c., Pluto. July 3rd, 1862.