The New Zealand Herald. AUCKLAND, SATURDAY, MAY 9, 1868.

New Zealand Herald, Volume V, Issue 1396, 9 May 1868, Page 3

The New Zealand Herald.

AUCKLAND, SATURDAY, MAY 9, 1868.

SrEOTEMUII AGENDO. " Give every man thine ec.r, but few thy voice : Take each man's censure, but reserve thy judgment. This above all, —To thine own self be true Ami it must follow, .15 the night the day, Thou canst not then be false to any man."

I>" the session of tho General Assembly of ISG7, an Act was passed entitled the " Land " Claims Arbitration 'Act, 1567," the object of which was to enable Mr. .lames Busby, formerly British Resident of this Colony, to submit, to arbitration certain land-claims which he has long urged both in the colony and at home against the Government of New Zealand. The Act provided that, on Mr. Busby's appointing an arbitrator on his part, and the Colonial Secretary appointing an arbitrator oil the part of the Government, these two should choose a third party, and that the award of any two of them should be final and conclusive. Dr. Pollen, Samuel Jackson, Esq., and Mr. J. T. Mackelvie were the arbitrators in the case, aud their award is now made public. Mr. Busby is adjudged the sum of ;£3G,SOO, which he will receive in land scrip as directed bv the Act, and which scrip must , as the Act directs, be exercised " in payment for any "lands to be selected by the said James Busby, within the said Province of Auek- " land, out of any lands open for sale or " selection under the provisions of the laws " for the time being in force within the said " Province, relating to the disposal of tho " Waste Lands of the Crown" —that is from lands belonging to the Provincial Government ; also the cost of arbitration, amounting to a sum of £3SO. Now we have no exception to take to the justness of Mr. Busby's claim, or to the award of the arbitrators, but we do protest in the name of the people of this province against an Act, the provisions of which these gentlemen in their award were bound to carry out, as well as against the ignorance, the apathy, or the wilful indifference, whichever it may be, to their constituents' interests, shown by the Auckland members in the House of Representatives in allowing the Act to pass in such a form. The bill was prepared by Messrs Carleton and A. Claris, and openly supported, as a reference to Hansard shows, by Messrs. Carleton, McLean, J. O'Neill, G. Graham, and Bail. Major lieaphy wae the only Auckland representative who spoke against the bill, and he spoke not against the terms of the bill, but against Mr. Busby's right to any award, and that only in" an undecided manner. To not one does it seem to have occurred that Mr. Busby's claim was one which in all fairness should have been advanced not against a particular province, but against the Colony at large. Whatever the award, that award should have been made a charge, if in money, on the Colonial Treasury, if in land, on the lands belonging to the General Government. No Auckland member,however, was found ready in his place to point this out —to show that Mr. Busby's claims were in existence before even the Constitution Act came into force, at a time •when the proceeds arising from the sale of waste lands of the Crown were ordinary Colonial revenue, that they were not expended in this or that province in which they might happen to be raised, but were applied to the purposes of the Colony at large. True, Auckland, has colonised or sold these very lands which Mr. Busby claimed, but that gives no just reason why the Province should be called upon to refund to Mr. Busby the compensation allowed to that gentleman by tho Colonial Government. In those days ""6 Southern settlements were kept in existh o by the revenue derived from the sale of tenc. Province, and if the balance lands i. , between Auckland and the rest were stru instead of being saddled of New Ze. <_ a General Government with the cost no gtronfer expression, blunder to use %ase of land already soldto respectrngthepurei. wou]d be thousands Mr. Busby—the Sou. . debt T et, neverof pounds in Auckland s nb without a theless, our Auckland meu flf tLig daim protest, allowed the satisiactu. u to be made a special charge 1 Province. , v „iu; r . n i "When we look at the known v opinions of the real framer of the Bil - . member for the Bay—we cannot but thu , That this Act was from the first mtendea to kill two birds with one stone to give Mr. Busby that which _ was justly his due, and to thoroughly cripple 'the Government of this province at the same time. The amount awarded is no less than 73,600 acres. Let this quantity oi land be selected by the claimant or those ■who may purchase his scrip, and where will the land be found with which the Provincial Government may meet the claims of holders of land orders already in the province and yet to arrive. It is as unfair to Mr. Busby, for if the claim be a just one, and it was right to have paid it in scrip, it was not right to have confined him to selection from lands which remain in the hands of the Provincial Government as a residue of several years transactions. The General Government have lands in Waikato, they have lands m other Provinces from which he should have been allowed to select, or. fairer _ still, he should have received his compensation m money, to the market value of the scrip, and the sum paid should have been charged to the Colonial Treasury. It is evident that the Superintendent views the matter in this light, if we may judge from the Gasetle issued yesterday, which withdraws from sale and selection the -Provincial lands, and sets them apart as required for certain special settlements. This virtually leaves Mr. Busby nothing to select from, and will doubtless in the next Session of the Assembly cause the mode of payment of the award to be brought forward for that

I just consideration which Auckland members, j forgetful of the interests of their constituencies, failed to give it in the last session.