Local Intelligence.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 10, Issue 601, 14 April 1866, Page 2

Local Intelligence.

Town Assessment. —The assessment of the general rate for the town, for the current year, has been posted at tlio office of the Town Board, where it will remain for a fortnight,- at the end of which time the Board will meet to hear objections! if any, to the rate laid on. Wanganui Garrick Club. —The second general meeting of the gentlemen composing this club was held on Monday evening last, at the Rutland Hotel. Mr. Perham, president of the club, occupied the chair. Mr. McKenna, who had been appointed stage manager, resigned in favour of Mr. Robinson. The services of Mrs. Massey, a professional artiste, were secured for a limited period at £2 a-week. The annual subscription to tlie club was fixed at two guineas, payable half-yearly. It is reported in select circles that the piece which is to celebrate the debut of the company is already fixed—something in the conjic vein—and that the performance will come off in about three weeks, but “no tales out of school” is enjoined on the members under a heavy penalty.

New Zealand Directory. —ln a brief paragraph on Wednesday we directed attention to this work, but it seems to us of so much importance to the colony, as to call for a few additional remarks. In a business point of view it is unnecessary to point out the advantagesof an undertaking of this kind ; commercial men, of course, will patronise it. But the first publication of a Directory In a country indicates some*thing like an era in its history. New Zea* land is taking its place among the nations, ranidly gathering around it all the plgns „7 al3 ?, £ a ctional “habitation and a name. The proprietorsi we are indebted tp’fhe pnig^l 180 o£a bourne firm for. this work) assure ihgpu,./" I'bat neither pains nor expense will pc spared in collecting full and correct information on all subjects introduced' into the directory, and we have qn earnest of their sincerity in this respect, in' the fact that Vi agent has even found his way to Wangan*ih Where lie now Is. We hope that the pitfellp .Will pet be slow to show their apJpw*fiai|gn {ggl approval of this publication.

MaTarawa Church. -“ This church will be formally opened for Divine service tomorrow afternoon at 3 o’clock, by the Rev. R. Taylor.

Street Express.—- A decided addition to the convenience of the public has just been made in the introduction to our streets of a handsome Express, by Mr. M'Farlane, with which he will carry goods and passengers toanypartofthetowu orsuburbs. Weareable to say that persona intrusting any commissions to Mr. M‘Farlane may rely upon having them correctly and faithfully executed. ’ ’ SEPARATION", MEETING. A public meeting of the electors of Wanganui, Turakina, Rangitikei, &c., called by the Separation Committee, was held in the Princess Theatre, on Thursday evening, to hear the report of the Committee, and to decide what steps, if any, should be taken for the further prosecution of the movement. William Kells, Esq., Chairman of the Town Board, having been called to the Chair, stated the object of the meeting, and called upon some member of the Committee to read the report. Mr. Bryce, M.H.R., read the following report:— To the Electors of Wanganui, Turakina, Rangitikei and Manawatu. 1. Gentlemen, —Your committee, in making this report would recall to your recolleetiflp the circumstances under which they were elected. 2. In August, 1864, a public meeting of the electors of Wanganui, Turakina, Rangitikei, and Manawatu, was convened by a number of Wanganui and Rangitikei settlers, for the purpose of discussing the question of whether the separation cf these districts froiu the province of Wellington was or was not desirable. 3. The meeting thus convened was duly held and numerously attended, and the result of a remarkably fair and full discussion was the passing of a resolution to the effect that separation was desirable. The meeting then proceeded to electa committee to take, on their behalf, the steps necessary for the attainment of the contemplated object—the erection of the country lj ing between the Manawatu and Patea rivers into Ja in terms of the New Provinces Act.

4. The separation committee thus constituted proceeded to fulfil the trust .reposed in them. A petition to the Governor, in duplicate, was prepared, and carried around to the electors for signature. It was rendered necessary by the law which regulates the establishment of New Provinces that three-fifths of the resident electors should sign a petition praying for separation, before it would become a valid document; your committee had the satisfaction not only of obtaining the necessary three-fifths, but, so general was the feeling in favour of the movement, that twenty-five signatures more than sufficient under the electoral roll of 1863 and 1864 were obtained, and not less than forty-five under the roll of 1864 and 1865. 5. The next step taken by the committee was the publication of the petition in a Wellington newspaper, it being legally necessary that this should he done for a period of eight weeks before presentation to the Governor. Your committee did not anticipate that anything further would be required than the mere presentation of the petition at the end of - that time to ensure the establishment of the new province, in accordance with the prayer of the petition and the wishes of their constituents. Q. Your committee, however, found that during the eight weeks in which they were necessarily somewhat inert, great, efforts to cause a reaction of the public feeling were being made by such of the electors of the existing province as were opposed to the movement. 7. His Honor the Superintendent of Wellington caused the Waitotara block to be thrown into the market, for the purpose, as was believed, of creating a feeling against separation, by depriving the proposed new province of a portion of that prospective revenue which, in the eyes of some of the electors rendered separation especially desirable at that time. * 8. Your committee regarded the sale of the Waitotara block, in the manner proposed, as being, apart from the direct loss of revenue, a calamity to the district, and they resolved to send, and did send, a deputation of two of their members to the General Government at Auckland, to call the attention of the Government to the evils likely to result from so injudicious an act, and to urge it to prevent the Wellington Government from consummating the sale, by reserving it for military settlers or otherwise, but no efforts of the deputation would induce the General Government to interfere in the matter. The sale therefore took place. 9. Your committee also found that signatures to a ccuuter-petition were being obtained by the anti-separationists, with a view apparently of inducing the Government to believe that the feeling of the electors of these districts was changing, and that they no longer desired the formation of a new province. It was also ascertained that the counter-petition was signed by non-electors as well as by electors; that the greatest efforts were being made to procure signatures, and that a considerable number of the electors who had signed the petition for separation were being induced to sign the petition against it.

10. Your committee did not consider that the counter-petition would have any effect in law, as such a petition is unknown to either the letter or the spirit of the New Provinces Act, but it was thought that such a petition, if not opposed by the separationists, might have an unfavourable effect on the Government, and would possibly at least cause delay. . The separation committee therefore prepared another petition, which they circulated for siguature, asking that the prayer of the legal "petition for separation should be granted without delay. The object of the petition being to indicate the state of feeling within the districts desiring separation, and the committee not thinking or expecting that it would be of any legal value, the siguature of the settlers generally were taken, whether on the electoral roll or not. The number of residents whose signaturos were obtained to this petition, was 438, against the signatures of about 270 residents on the counter-petition.

11. The original petition having now been published for the prescribed period, your committee forwarded the two petitions to his Excellency the Governor, entrusting them to a deputation of three of their members. On the arrival of that deputation in Auckland,, they found that the General Assembly was in session, that the Fox-Whitaker Ministry had resigned, and ttat the Weld Ministry, with Mr. Sewell as Attorney-General, were just assuming the reins of office. These circumstances very much complicated their task, and rendered it most arduous.

12. The petitions were immediately presented, and the deputation were urgent that the mind of the Government should be expressed upon them, and using the interval between the presentation of the petition and the decision of. the Government thereon, an attempt was made in the House of Representatives to repeal the New Provinces Act, but owing, your committee believe, in a great measure, to the vigorous efforts and representations of the deputation, the attempt failed. The decision of the Government was. now o n~y i us]y looked for, and was at length ejc. y- ~ r -. a memorandum written ly the Att** ’ Mr. Newell. This memorandly Inconsistent with duni, whicl\ ’ -ded bv M^omjvjstifce 'iand wffh itself, ; n the mending ihe feovei-nor to take ijo m the Wanganui heparivtipp petition. 1& 5 The opinion of the best legal authorise* in "Now Zealand >v' as tliorefore upon question, of whether the Wanganui

separation petitioners had fulfilled the requirements of the law, and in eVery case an answer in the affirmative was received. . 14. Your committee were further advised that an injunction could be obtained to compel the government to carry out the law, but as it could only have been obtained by a petition to the British parliament, and as it would have involved great expense and loss of time it was not judged expedient to attempt to obtain one. 15. But a meeting of the electors who had signed the petition for separation was at this time called by the committee, at which meeting they declared that they had done their utmost to fulfil their trust, that they had failed in consequence of the unjust decision of the General Government, that therefore they resigned, and left it to the meeting to say what was to bo done under the circumstances. The meeting Immediately and unanimously re-elected the committee with increased numbers, directing them to do whatever was necessary to be done for the purpose of obtaining the separation of these districts from the province of Wellington. 16. A new petition was therefore prepared shortly after this meeting, and was signed with slowness and deliberation to avoid the charge of indecorous haste which had been urged against the first petition, and by the month of July 1865 it was again ready for publication. 17. About this time, ns two of the-members of the committee were about to proceed to Wellington on public business, they were requested by the committee, to watch the interest of the separation!sts, in view of the approaching meeting of the General Assembly, and shortly afterwarda'the petition itself Was sent down to them with instructions to publish it if they thought its publication advisable. They however did not consider it advisable or expedient for various reasons to publish the petition at that time, and accordingly returned it to Wanganui in the month of August 1805. 8. Previous, however, to the return of the gentlemen who represented the committee in Wellington, an attempt was made by the Government In the General Assembly to pass an act limiting the operation of the New Provinces Act. The proposed bill appeared to the members of the committee already alluded to to be highly objectienable, they therefore exerted themselves against it. and had the satisfaction of seeing .that the bill, when it came on for its second reading was lost,, the motion which defeated it being moved by the member for Wanganui, Mr. Harrison.

19. Most unexpectedly to the committee, the unparliamentary course was subsequently adopted in the House of Representatives, of proposing another bill during the same session, of similar intent to the one which had 'been lost. Your committee therefore published the petition in the ‘Advertiser’ newspaper, for the purpose of calling attention to the separation question in Wanganui, hut without forwarding to his Honor the Superintendent the copy which the law required should be sent to him eight weeks before the petition could, be presented to the Governor, aa they intended to wait until the new elections would come into operation in the following October, and republish the petition with fresh signatures, forwarding the copy to his Honor then. Your committee also (the members having returned from Wellington) wrote to Messrs. Harrison and Pharazyn, the members in the General Assembly for Wanganui and Rangitikei, requesting them to propose a clause when the bill was in committee exempting Wanganui from its operation for a period of nine months. Mr. Harrison agreed to comply with the recj nest of the committee sending them a draft of the clause which he intended to propose, he, however, failed to carry out his intention. Mr Pharazyn refused to propose the clause suggested by the Committee, giving as his reason for the refusal that the Act merely transferred the functions of the Government under the New Provinces Act to the legislature. ’ •

20. Your committee would desire to point out to you that the act in question does something more than this. Under the New Provinces Act it was imperative upon the Government to comply , with the prayer for separation of three-fifths of the resident electors of a district under certain conditions. The Act past during the last session of the Assembly does not bind either the government or the legislature to be guided in the smallest degree by the wishes of the electors. This is certainly a very obvious and most important distinction, bearing directly upon tlie present aspect of the separation question in Wanganui. 21. The best endeavours of the separation committee having thus failed to secure to you the right of presenting a petition to the Governor under the New Provinces Act, they withdrew it'from publication, the Act under which it was intended to have been presented having been virtually repealed, so far at least as that petition was concerned.

22. Your committee therefore decided at a very full meeting of the members, held in last November, that the basis of thelaw, upon which action was to have been taken by them for the orection of a new province, had been so much altered since tlieir election that it had become their duty to report to their constituents, and resign the office which had been conferrad upon them.

23. But it was determined to prevent the possibility of their being charged with agitating the public mind for party purposes that the meeting of their constituents should not bo called until after the termination of the general election for the House of Representatives, and thus the meeting has been delayed until the present'time. 24. With,reference to the state of the separation question at present in these districts, and the course which ought, now to he adopted, your committee have no wish to offer any opinion or suggestions. Individual members of the committee may advocate any course they may believe to be the proper one, hut the separation committee, as a body, now leave the matter in the hauds of the public, and give no.opinion on the subject, beyond stating what, indeed, it is scarcely necessary to point out that, if efforts to pbtain separation are to be persisted‘inj the direction which those efforts must take is either the revival of the question of the legality of the first separation petition or a new petition for separation addressed to the legislature of the colony, ,or both of.these methods combined.

25. Beforo concluding this report it may be proper to refer for one moment to certain charges which have been brought against the committee of publishing with the petition the names of electors who had not signed it. Your committee onlyrefer to these charges for the purpose of stating that they now beg to lay on the table before you one duplicate of the first petition, and both duplicates of the last petition referred to in this report. These documents contain the disputed names either by genuine signatures or by forgery, and it is unnecessary to say that your committee repudiate the latter suggestion. Tfiese proofs of the integrity of tlie separation committee can be examined by a committee appointed by you for the purpose or in any other way you'may think proper. 25 The separation committee having faithfully endeavoured for a period of more than a year and a-half, to carry out the object for which they were elected to a successful end, beg now to resign into your hands the trust which you have so long reposed in them. T. Harper, Chairman.

Mr. Field moved the adoption of the report, which was seconded by Mr. Strachan. The motion was carried unanimously ; and thereafter a vote of thanks to the Committee, for the efforts they had made to carry out the wishes of the publio, was also proposed and parried enthusiastically. Mi-. Morgan then moved that the following geiitiomqn be appointed a Committee

to take suck steps as circumstances may dictate for the furtherance of Separation : Mr. Harper Mr. Jos. Willcox ~ P. L. Sim ~ John Morgan ~ W. Hutchison ~ W. Paterson Dr. Curl ~ G. Beaven Mr. George Roberts „G. Y. Lethbridge ~ John Mcßetb ~ George Howe Mr. Morgan said he would like to make a few remarks in connection with the subject before the meeting. It was generally supposed that the position and prospects of separation were not so good now as they were when the agitation began, and there was a good deal of truth in the supposition, but how, he would ask, had this come to be the case ? Just because the Superintendent of the province of Wellington had done all lie could to cripple their resources, and put them into such a position as that it would not be easy for them to separate. On the question being first discus*ed, they had the Waitotara block—it was now gone, and they all knew how and in what way it had gone. It was very, bad and some people said they were beaten ; he denied it—they might be vanquished—vanquished by illegal and improper means—but not beaten. And they could go on still. Looking at the estimates made at the beginning, and comparing them with the revenue now, it would bo seen at a glance how moderately the Separationists had calculated. The late Mr. Hewitt had estimated the three-eighths of the customs at, £3OOO, assessments at £IOOO, and land revenue at £14,000; in all, £17,000 or £IB,OOO. Mr. Bryce’s estimate had been much the same. But what was the fact ? The customs revenue of Wanganui for last year had been upwards of £20,000, leaving nearly £BOOO as the share that would come back to the settlers. This source of revenue had doubled and even trebled since the first estimates were made. Of course much fine land had been squandered, for Dr. Featherston had actuallv squandered the Waitotara block (applarso), but something still remained. The Superintendent went on the supposition that they could not go on without land, and he was so far right, but there might still be some on which he could not lay his hands. At least he (Mr. Morgan) hoped so. He might tell them more. Anything they had got from the Superintendent was given to S( paration. On the 16th day of June, 1852,, the first Separation meeting was held in Wanganui, and on that very day the first pile of the Wanganui bridge was driven by Dr. Featherston. Separation has not yet been carried, and the bridge ia not yet built. In 1864 Separation was once more agitated, and then again the bridge was spoken of, and we were told it was ordered. The Bridge, however, did not come. Now when this meeting was advertised the bridge was ordered once more (laughter and applause). It was his belief there was some fatality about that bridge, and certainly if they were determined to be good children and let separation alone in the future, they would never see a bit of it. Dr. Featherston was not Superintendent of Wanganui (oh ! oh—yes ! yes !) —he was rejected by a large majority of the electors, but he was forced upon them by Wellington. He was held up by many people as a clever statesman, but he (Mr. Morgan) saw very little of it. When Dr. Featherston was first elected Superintendent, some fourteen years ago, the Province was clear of debt, with a large territorial revenue in prospective, now, after fourteen years of his statesmanship, the province was deep in debt. It did not require a very clever man to get into debt, but it would take a clever man to get out of it, and it was little credit to a statesman to have incurred a debt of £BO,OOO without anything to show for it. Most of the money had been expended in the town and harbour of Wellington, and it was hard to see how it could be cleared off but by a direct tax upon the community. Why should they pay a tax to make Wellington harbour 1 If there were to to be a free and strict scrutiny of the public accounts, he believed that Wanganui would not owe a single penny of the debt due by the province (Applause). He for one at least would not quietly submit to be thus wronged, and lie entered his protest against such a thing being done. While he advocated separation, he did not believe in provincialism, separation was but a present requirement, and the sooner these costly provincial institutions were done away with the better (Applause). But let us have separation in the meantime, at all events, so that we might manage our own affairs. There had been very seriouß charges brought against the Separation Committee. He was then as one of that body to challenge any man to prove any of these charges. He was there also to answer any questions, but if that night, their opponents held their peace let them never make unfounded charges against the Committee again. (Cheers). If it had not been for the Separation agitation they would not have had as much money spent here as there had been. As to the Bridge it was absolutely nothing as yet, and the electors had better keep agitating if they had any wish to get it. Mr. Morgan concluded by again moving his resolution. Mr. A. D. Willis seconded the motion.

Mr. Gamer rose to propose an amendment to the effect that Mr. Morgan’s proposition be read that day six months. Mr. G. spoke at some length on things in general and nothing very particularly. His amendment was seconded by Mr. E. T. Woon. The motion and amendment having been put to the meeting, the former was carried by a large majority, and there being no other business, a vote of thanks to the Chairman terminated the proceedings. The Committee feel indebted to Mr. McKenna, of the Rutland Hotel, for kindly granting the use of the theatre and lighting it up for the meeting without charge.

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT. Thursday. April 12. [Before D. S. Durie, Esq., R.M.] RIGHT OP WAY. A case of some importance, as affecting the interests of outlying settlers was heard to-day. Mita Karaka, a native, charged Mr. William Reid, of Pi pi, witli shutting up a native track close to the Wangaehu, by erecting a gate upon the same and putting a padlock upon it. Damages were laid at £2. It appears that Mr. Reid some time ago purchased a quantity of land in the district referred to, through which the alleged track runs, and he had latterly fenced a portion of it, thus shutting up the track. Before doing so he had brought the matter before the Board of Wardens, a committee of whom had visited the place, and had given it as their opinion that there was nb road in that direction. Mr. Reid had also consulted the Provincial Solicitor in Wellington, who had advised him to resist any claim for a road asserted in the way this had been. The track, moreover, was of the most devious description, “ winding as old roads will,” here to the right and again

to the left—doubling and turning very like a law-suit in which it has now ended, and completely cutting up the fenced paddock through which it ran. Some parties had recognised Mi. Reid’s right to shut up the track by negotiating with him for a right of way, although others, like the plaintiff, had not done bo. This was substantially the case for the defence.

The case for the opposite side was the strong one of usage and prescription. The plaintiff deposed that the road had been open to Europeans and Maoris since ever he remembered anything, and that he did not know of any other way. by which he* could get frpm the Native Reserve to No. 2 Line. The decision leant td prescriptive right and the Maoris, and, after a patient hearing, judgment was given for the plain-tiff-damages 55., costs of court arid witnesses, 355. •