The Pahiatua Herald. with which is incorporated THE PAHIATUA STAR. Published Mondays. Wednesdays, and Fridays. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 1893.

Pahiatua Herald, Volume I, Issue 71, 3 November 1893, Page 2

The Pahiatua Herald. with which is incorporated THE PAHIATUA STAR. Published Mondays. Wednesdays, and Fridays. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 1893.

The letter published by Air S. Bacon in our issue of October 30th recalls to mind the celebrated Kermadec expedition, and discloses certain irregularities on which it would be well to throw a little light. The circumstances connected vith the formation of the Kermadec Association will, perhaps,' bear recapitulation. In 1887 the Kermadec group of islands were annexed by Mr Percy Smith (then Assistant SurveyorGeneral) on behalf of the New Zealand Government, and a pamphlet written by Mr Smith was soon afterwards published giving full particulars of the climate, soil, etc., of the group, and descanting in terms of most extravagant praise on the richness of the soil and the luxuriance of all semitropical vegetation. In February 1889 the Government issued printed notices offering portions of Sunday Island for lease under the small run system, but applications to the Auckland Waste Lands Board proved abortive owing to the Government having withdrawn the land from sale. Not long afterwards Messrs Ihovell A Co., lessees of sections (1 and 7, issued a prospectus ottering sub-leases of the sections, the inducements the prospectus held out being mainly ottered on the authority of the pamphlet of the present Surveyor - General. This pamphlet painted the island in the most glowing colors, both as regards climate and capabilities, and described it, inferentially, as a very paradise for small settlers. On the strength of these extracts the Kermadec Association was formed, and a number of people, trusting implicitly in the truthfulness of a report bearing the im!iriinatur of the Government of New Zealand, broke up their homes in New Zealand, and proceeded to the islands of which the agent of the Government spoke in such glowing terms. There their illusion was speedily dispelled. The islands proved to be simply an aggregation of gigantic and precipitous rocks, utterly incapable of producing sufficient vegetable food of any variety (save in one circumscribed area) to sustain life in any human being. The rich soil was conspicuous only by its entire absence. The “ charming ” climate is best described in the words of one of the settlers :

“ The climate is certainly equable as regards temperature, but mild it certainly is not. It is very humid, very relaxing, very prostrating, a climate requiring a deal of nourishment to keep up a person's normal strength, a climate which soon shows its effects in ttaciditv of the muscles, continued feeling of a vacuum in the stomach, and a feeling that the place is a splendid one to die in.” There was no water on the island save in the crater, and to obtain that, almost perpendicular rocks had to be scaled, the difficulty of which was so great that to get a bucketful of water required half-a-day’s climbing. High winds prevailed to such an extent that except in one portion of the island (where Air Bell is settled) any attempt at cultivation, even had the soil proved favorable, must have been futile. As an instance of the falseness of the Government report we need only refer to an illustration in the pamphlet, depicting a banana grove on Sunday Island. The trees are laden with enormous bunches of bananas of marvellous growth. In the original photo from which the illustration is taken there is not a single banana to be seen ; and when confronted with this fact at a sitting of the Petitions Committee Mr Percy Smith took refuge in the pitiful excuse that it was an artist’s license to introduce them. Probably also it was an artist’s license which was responsible for the appearance of a covey of waterfowl in a view of the. old crater lake on Sunday Island, in the original photo, ol which none were to be seen. The photographer may also be excused on a like plea for having in every instance taken his picture with the least perpendicular (no other term can express it) hills in the background. The whole pamphlet was false and misleading, beyond the shadow of a doubt. We have before us the sworn testimony of nearly every member of the ill-fated Association, and all agree that the report was absolutely false in every important particular. Nevertheless, it answered its purpose, and in due course the members of the Association were dumped down wherever rocks could be found with sufficient standing room to allow them to get ashore. On this barren and unhospitable island they dragged out a precarious existence for eleven long months until (with the exception of Mr Carver and part of his family) they were taken away by the Government steamer, llinemoa, and once more landed in Auckland. While on the island every member of the Association, including Mr Carver, signed a declaration to ttte effect that

Mr Percy Smith's pamphlet was false and misleading, and on the return of ] .he settlers they petitioned Parliament ' for compensation on the ground that they were induced to go solely by the glowing accounts given by a report 1 published by the authority of the Government and therefore presumably reliable. The claim was duly heard before the Petitions Committee in 1891, but Mr Smith materially qualified his statements as to the richness M the soil, and was thus allowed to >verride his published report. The committee decided that the petitioners had no claim, notwithstanding that an authoritative report had led them to he venture. But now comes the peculiar and inexplicable part of the business. After the rest of the settlers had determined to leave the island, Mr Carver (whose expressed opinions concerning the place were equally acrimonious with those of his fellow settlers) carried on a correspondence with Mr Percy Smith, and there is strong suspicion that as a result of this he prolonged his stay on the island. At all events, notwithstanding his denunciations of the Government report and of Percy Smith, and against the wishes of his family, he remained on the island some time longer; but at length even he had to succumb and return to New Zealand. And now occurs a little incident that requires looking into. At a recent meeting of the Auckland Waste Land Board a letter was read from the author of the reliable (?) report, Mr Percy Smith, recommending that Mr Carver should be paid the sum of £l5O for improvements effected on holding No 7 of which he was the lessee. Now we have the authority of several members of the Kermadec Association and of important documentary evidence for stating that Mr Carver was not the lessee of No 7 and that even if he had been there was not a pound’s worth of improvement on it. In addition to this it is necessary before any grant can be made that improvements should be properly valued. Certainly no valuer has seen the alleged improvements on Sunday Island and it is equally certain that Mr Percy Smith could not conscientiously swear to their existence. Therefore the transaction has a decidedly dubious appearance on the face of it, and there is strong suspicion of at least acquiescence on the part of Mr Percy Smith. If those settlers who were admittedly misled by an authoritative report are not entitled to compensation for their loss and sufferings then there is nothing more certain than that to pay Carver for improvements that never existed on land to which he had no right would be nothing short of gross favoritism. The recommendation itself induces reflec-. tions of a nature not complimentary to the Surveyor-General nor to his connection with an affair which looked at from any point of view cannot add lustre to his fame. We have stated the facts. In the name of all that is just we hope that the iniquitous recommendation of Percy Smith may not be carried into effect, but that Mr Carver may meet with that reward which , tradition always ascribes as the recomi pense for treachery.