The Opunake Times. TUESDAY, OCTOBER 29, 1895. WEST COAST LESSEES’ PETITION.

Opunake Times, Volume III, Issue 138, 29 October 1895, Page 2

The Opunake Times. TUESDAY, OCTOBER 29, 1895. WEST COAST LESSEES’ PETITION.

When Mr R. Thompson, Chairman of the Waste Lands Committee, brought up the report of that Committee in the House, Mr McGuire moved “ that the report bo. referred back to the Committee for farther consideration, on the ground that the decision arrived at was not in accordance with the evidence. When the report was considered there were only three members present—one of them the chairman, who heard the whole of the evidence ; the second member only heard part of the evidence ; and the third, who was the Minister of Lands, was not present at all while the evidence was being given, the Minister appearing for the first time when the Waste Lands Committee were considering the evidence in order to make their report. He was perfectly certain that if the Minister had heard the evidence he could not have helped coming to a different conclusion ; and if the other members of the Committee had been present they would have had a very different report—a report which would have recommended the case to the favorable consideration of the Government. They would also have recommended that the Act should be amended and the land administered by the Laud Board. The Act as at present administered was injuriously affecting over a thousand men, women and children, and it was a matter deserving of some consideration. Under the West Coast Settlement Act a large amount of power was placed in the hands of the Public Trustee, which he had not exercised with that discretion allowed by the Act in the interest of all concerned. In fact, he regarded himself as a mere machine, whose sole function was to secure for the estate all he could screw out of the tenants, regardless of what they felt or suffered. By his action settlement was retarded and a penalty was placed upon the enterprise of those settlers who were trying, under great difficulties, to make comfortable homes for their families. They required a practical man, not a mere machine. The Land Board should take the place of the Public Trustee. In fact, such were the policy and practice of the Public Trustee, who refused to allow any amendment to the Act, that farmers were robbed of ail improvements made by them in excess of £5 per acre. The tenants had taken up their land while it was in a prairie state, and to confiscate improvements over a certain value was to bar settlement, and was a foul stain on the Government, who were continually professing to be working in the true interest of settlement. . .

He should have allowed the natives and the settlers under the Act to settleamongst themselves as far as rent was concerned, but in place of that he himself fixed the rent, and would not deviate from that position. He also put the unfortunate settlers to considerable expense in advertising these meetings in the papers, and a great deal of law expenses besides. In fact, the whole thing had been in the interests of the lawyers and newspapers. The Public Trustee also refused to pay any local rating, and the unfortunate local body was put in great difficulty in consequence. . . . The Public

Trustee held about 100,000 acres for the natives, and allowed gorse and other things to grow on it, which was very detrimental to the settlers living in the immediate neighborhood of these lands; and therefore he thought the Minister of Lands should see that the Public Trustee kept his gorse and noxious weeds in order. Noav, for these and other reasons the settlers had been petitioning the House to have these estates administered by the Land Board of the district. No doubt the Public Trustee was a very good officer in his own particular line ; but he had spent the whole of his lifetime in an office, so that he could hardly know anything about the value of land. Yet this gentleman, sitting in his office in Wellington, fixed the rent, and there is no appeal against it. The mere calling a meeting of settlers was nothing more or less than a farce.

. . . The Public Trustee had said in his evidence that ho did not care anything for the settlement of the country or the sufferings and feelings of the people. He would ask the Government under these circumstances if the Public Trustee was the proper man to administer this large estate.

. . . He noticed that the Premier laughed. He had boon informed that when the Premier was in the district the other dry he made the people promises, which ho hoped the honorable gentleman would now carry out He was very pleasant to the people there, and said that legislation was required, and he invited them to petition the House, and promised to assist them. Mr McGuire hoped the House would seriously consider this matter, and that it would bo relegated back to the Committee for further consideration. . . . He did not blame the Public Trustee for hiving such an exalted opinion of himself, because the Ministry of the day had certainly made him as important as they possib'y could. He was n ing that coast with an iron rod ; and, not satisfied with that, he was actually writing letters to the papers in order to prejudice Parliament and the country in this matter. Mr McGuire then read the letter sent by tuo Public Trustee to the Hon Mr Ward, traversing the lessees’ petition, which appeared in our columns on September 27th.'