THE NELSON EXAMINER. Nelson, August 30, 1845.

Nelson Examiner and New Zealand Chronicle, Volume IV, Issue 182, 30 August 1845, Page 102

THE NELSON EXAMINER. Nelson, August 30, 1845.

Joumtli become more necertaifr aa men become molfe equal and individualiim more to be feared. It would be tb underrate their importance to suppose that they serve inly to secure liberty : they maintain 'civilization;Dk Tocquivilli. Of Democracy in America, vol. iv., p. 202. Hjs Excellency Captain Fitzßoy, Governor of New Zealand, &c, &c, &c, in addition to the many unatoned insults already ; offered by , him to the settlers in Cook's Straits, has just offered ' another, ''(Jailed' a Crown Grant for the lands in those iparts (purchased by the Company. . >" Yet onee 1 more ye nettles, and once ■more, ye brambles sere." The subject is as dry,' stale, and t withered as thorny and disagreeable ; but we ' suppose We must Ixandle it once more ; once more Battologize on New. Zealand Company's rights and New Zealand Company's land claims, in the faint hope that our " repetitions " may not for ever be tr vain." •*--••" - : You know the old agreement of 1840 between Lord John Russell and the Comjatty* Company to have, out of land clajxned . by them, as many acres as they had- spent' crowns in emigration and other purposes, which turned out to be about a million. . " We have spent the money, give us the land," saiid the Company. " No," answered government, " our view of the affair was "this:' prove first that your claims were valicl, that you are out and out absolute possessors- of the 20 millions of acres you claim ; arid .then we will sell you over again the one million acres ,of your own land at ' fife- shillings an acre. We have got the money'; now all ijou t have tp do (and it is >a great favour we are granting, 'mind) is to jbtote,' according to agreement; that the land ;was*' already truly; and validly your dWH.'C When- "you have done that to our Satisfaction, We shall have no hesitation in giving it you." This .was the proposal' of fhe ; modest Colonial Office. The power of &cq! some 'people.' have is astounding. So . the claims were to he proved ; the 'Company was to show .that' the- land they had.l, bought,'. of Government was already tneirown. ■ • '.-' But Government went about it so slowly .(for ; it ;took the affair of proving into its own ' hand*) that other arrangements were indispensable. On the Bth. May, 1843, accordingly Mr. Somes thus writes to the Colonial Office: — ',' for the purpose of effectually settling the question of the Company's titles, and of quieting the minds Of their purchasers, they suggest that your lordship should forthwith direct his Excellency to make to the Company a conditional grant of the lands selected by their agents: the Company obtaining' within the district so selected the whole- title which the Crown may have the power to grant, and having the option, in the event of prior, claims being; set up, of either excluding from the selected lands such portions as may appear to be subject to such prior: claims, and in that case receiving a corresponding number of acres in lieu ; or. of including' such portions subject to the prior iitje, but obtaining from the Crown in respect of them the exclusive right of pre-emption enjoyed by the Crown; the Governor and Council being instructed as soon as practicable to establish some general rule for defining native titles, and settling fee claims to land, and to do their best to aid the agents of --the Company in effecting the necessary arrangements roth the natives, either- for the purchat* *fl«ind» belonging to them, but unimproved, onfstvmaJanjfJm, the part of the Company equitable compensation Jbr the, original value of the land which ntajihape been occupied by themselves or their settlers without sufficient ti(le,Jbnt ia which they may have effected, improvements." , o'BoW. days after, pn the 12th May, .1843, Mr.- Hope "writes thus from the Colonial t Vi|i«ffd JStanley directs me to state hit assent to theff«,;prp|K>wl*" .[about buying land at AuckUndj, r , t V. Wl. to intimate further that he will be pmppx^d to iffsuft to the 1 Governor of New Zealand instaHcQons^a the effect' proposed in your letter, fox eflj^tuUly I«ettlhig'the1 «ettlhig'the question of the Company'! tiUes'^lauifn that colony." Was .this an acceptance of trie <sompmy's proposal or not ? Was this, ojr ygsA^jt riot, ' an 'agreement binding on hfPtfourablp men ? If ; the literal words are n'6t conclusive enough,; it may further be observed that the whole affair, was an amicable settlement of differences ; that all the

otherjbroposals in ths are cordially except ohb fabdut?* LieutenantGoVeftwm or Superintendent tjcs the South), to -which assent is lestf.feftwed than withheld to a future opportunity of granting it. Again, is it not as clear as day that the agreement was, that the whole title the Crown had powet to grant Was forthwith to bft'given^to even 'disputed lands*; the Company having the option of rejecting or "mating' compensation for "any lands afterwards proved to belong to others ? . Afterwards ,, proved, we. say ;. for, , the Company being ultimately to: have the option 1 of taking the whole lands selected by their agents, at an equitable compensation to others whose claims might he proved, it was giving them no more power over the property of others to give them such a grant immediately than to give it after the investigation. And the whole object of the agreement, the only purpose which made it necessary to be entered into, was to set aside the Land Claims Court as far as it interfered with actual present possession and occupation of land by the Company's settlers. That being obtained, the Court might go on if it pleased, and arrange compensation where due at its leisure. It was a case in general principle like that of a railway company, or one for making a new street through a town, or for any other public object, where the rights of individuals have to be sacrificed to the demands of persons engaged in works acknowledged to be of public importance. As people in the cases mentioned have to give up land or houses which they very likely would prefer not parting with at all, at a compensation awarded by a jury or otherwise, so here private claims to land had to be sacrificed to those of a public body : only (as the Court to decide these claims and award compensation was, ' from whatever cause, so long in getting this done) the public body — that the thousands might not wait for the units, the good of the many be sacrificed to that of the few — was to be enabled to take possession at once of lands required by its scheme, and go on with its work, leaving the question of compensation to be arranged subsequently and at leisure. This was the meaning, if it had any at all, of the agreement for primd facie grants, between Lord Stanley and the Company. Well, Lord Stanley promises to give effect to the agreement, by writing to Captain Fitzßoy to carry it out. Now what did he actually write ? June, 26th, 1843. — " You will there perceive " (alluding to a previous despatch of 19th May, to Mr. Sortland) " that her Majesty's Government have conceded to the Company, as regards the district included in the original agreement, that, with a view to facilitate the adjustment of their titles, the Local Government of New Zealand should be directed to make to the Company's Agents a conditional grant of the land selected by them, on the terms definitively stated in that correspondence ; the principle of that concession being to allow to the Company a primd facie title to such lands, under the condition that the validity of their purchases shall not be successfully impugned by other parties. Subject to this qualification, I concur in the view taken by you on this point." Now we say most distinctly that this was not at all " the principle of the concession." The principle of the concession — we appeal to the common sense of our readers to decide for vs — was not, as Lord Stanley states, that the Company were to have a title to those lands only to which a better title was not proved by others, but that they were to have a title, and all the title the Crown could give, to all the land selected by their agents, on the condition that they should afterwards make compensation for, or exchange lands to which a better title was proved. There is a vast difference here. According to one view, the Company were to have an immediate title to all the selected lands they wished to take; according to

the other, only-to such parts of those lands as nobody did or should hereafter dispute with, them. According to Lord Stanley's view, then, as almost all the claims wers disputed, with or without grounds, and as at all events it had to be seen whether they would be disputed or not, even his conditional grant could not be made till the claims were decided upon : so Mr. Spain's court was to "go oh as before; the Company was completely taken in ; the agreement was turned into a perfect mummery, the principal object of it being utterly defeated.

What was to be done? Both parties rush to Parliament. The House of Commons, by its Committee, pronounces against the modesty of the original proposition of Lord Stanley and the Colonial Office, and declares, by its fourth resolution, that the Company have a right to immediate possession of the land they had paid the Crown for, without any regard to the validity or otherwise of their purchases from the natives.

This, as far as we understand, is the history of the " breach of faith " question between Lord Stanley and the Company ; to be decided by the second appeal to the House, given notice of in the last papers we have received. Had the Colonial Office obeyed the instructions of the Committee, it never need have been agitated.

But what care irresponsible, secret-work-ing Colonial Offices for being pronounced little better than knaves ? Can the pride of a Stanley — that very magnificent and very melo-dramatic haughtiness, which to a Walter Scott seemed so charming in certain ancient old ladies of the noble lord's race, and which certainly became them better than it does any of their juvenile or masculine descendants — was this " ancestral thing " to be scared by the fiat of a Committee of a House of Commons? Lord Stanley, forsooth, will show them what better becomes his blood.

Things go on, therefore, exactly as before; the Court " drags its slow length along," and the Company's main purchases are proved valid. The districts of the Hutt, Manewatu, part of Wanganui, were validly purchased; compensation is made for the rest. They all belong to the Company. " The Court awards them, and the law doth give them."

The whole of the districts in Tasman's Gulf — Nelson, Waimea, Motuaka, Massacre Bay, are proved better bought than any other lands in New Zealand. The whole block comprising the settlement of New Plymouth, at Taranaki, is declared validly purchased. They all belong to the Company. " The law allows them, and the Court awards them."

And what, then, does Captain Fitzßoy ? After reversing the Taranaki decision, and preventing the Wairau claim coming before the Court at all, he offers to the settlers, and by every legal and equitable right the actual owners of all these districts, the very same conditional title to the remaining part of them, which two years ago ought, in all fair dealing and fair construction of agreements, to have been given them to the whole of the districts.

In the copy of the Nelson grant before us occurs the following clause :—": — " And also excepting any portions of land within any of the lands hereinbefore described to which private claimants or any private claimant may have already proved or may hereafter prove that they, he, or any of them had a valid claim prior to the purchase of the New Zealand Company." May hereafter claim ! In God's name, are these claims, then, not settled yet? Is Mr. Spain's Court to be re-established, and the whole five years' work to come over again ?

This conditional grant is exactly in accordance with Lord Stanley's most unfair and incorrect view of the agreement of 1848. At Wellington the lands of private claimants are granted to themselves, not to the Company with compensation to them. It is not even what we had a right to two

years ago; but only a miserable instalment of what was then, if there be any meaning in words, any faith in contracts, our mojst unquestionable due. And Captain Fitzßi >y has the face to offer us now, and the coc Iness to demand £1,100 in fees for, a fraction of a grant which, complete, was only of consequence twenty-four months back, and before the decision of the Land Claims Court. ■ - If the > Company's Agents do not spu a. an offer of such insulting injustice with i: idignation and contempt, all we can say i s, they deserve all the treatment it is/-vre\ hope, the acme and climax of.

We mentioned in our shipping notice* of last week that 78 passengers sailed hence in the Palmyra, for Adelaide; 74 of whom were from this place. The reason which induced a large number of these persons to leave Nelson is a little mysterious, seeing that in no colony of the present day ha' re labourers had such opportunities offered the n of bettering their condition as the immigrants of the New Zealand Company to th is settlement. Of the 74 persons who left, 3 2 were Germans, for whom a passage was pr< >- vided gratuitously by a subscription raise d in Adelaide. Of the 42 English, 13 we c children under twelve years of age; 19 we c males above that age ; and 10 were females. Out of the 19 males, only two had cv ;r cultivated land here, the majority of the: n being mechanics. One of these men, ,wl io came out to the colony as a labourer thr< !e or four years ago, is now able, from the fruits of his well-directed industry, to tale an expensive cabin passage for himself an d family, and carry with him from £100 i;o £200. Another man, also a labourer, ii - formed us that after paying £11 fox the passage of himself and wife, and laying in a stock of provisions for two months, he ha d still £40 by him, and that, had he frequente d the public-house less, he should have he d at least £100. It is certain then that many of these people have left the colony from any reason but want of success here, ncr can we assign any motive for their conduct but a vague fear of the natives. Whatever inducements South Australia may offer to the capitalist, New Zealand is essentially the labourer's home. With land that scarcely produces more than 15 bushels of wheat to the acre, what can be thought of a man who exchanges for this, land which will average 30 bushels? Men like these, who really do not know when their bread is we] 1 buttered, deserve but little sympathy if they are made to feel the effects of their follj: We have seen two or three letters from South Australia, written by persons who left here in the Augustus early in the yea: •, and from the admissions they contain it i s evident the writers themselves are aware of the mistake they have made. To say nothing of the universally admitted superiority of the climate of New Zealand, the certainty of employment in South Australia is far more questionable than is generally supposed. We must not omit to mention the condition of the Palmyra and the ac - commodation afforded to her passenger!!. Laden with oil, timber, and other Ne v Zealand produce f the only spare room wi is on the top of the cargo. Consequently i i the upper part of the hold of this vessel <>f only 147 tons, 74 human beings weie lodged, or rather stowed. Planks were lai d on the cargo, the space between which an d the deck, exclusive of the beam, was barely four feet, and this was divided into two sleeping berths, each berth for two persons i. Along the centre of the temporary deck on which these berths were erected was stowe d the passengers' luggage, leaving a passage of about three feet in width on each side of it; and as the berths were about six feet i a length, it follows that the unfortunate passengers,, when out of them, are confined to this limited space in their front, in the proportion of four persons to every six feet in length of this dark, low, narrow, and il - ventilated hole. It is painful to conten -. plate the state to which a six weeks' passage at this season must necessarily reduce them. Why has the Passengers Act not beejn brought into operation in this colony ? i We beg to acquaint our subscribers that with the present number closes a quarter of our paper.