I.—l

2

No. 37. —Petition of James Young. Petitioner, late a warder in the Auckland Gaol, states that he was discharged owing to ill-health, and received compensation. He prays for further consideration. I am directed to report that the Committee can see no reason to alter the decisions arrived at in the last three sessions. 13th May, 1887.

No. 54. —Petition of Charles Cameron and Others. Petitioners, ratepayers in the Borough of Marton and County of Eangitikei, pray that the Wanganui Harbour Board Eating Bill may not be passed, or that the County of Eangitikei may be excluded from the Wanganui Harbour District. I am directed to report that, as a Bill dealing with the subject-matter of this petition is now before the House, the Committee has no recommendation to make. 13th May, 1887.

No. 61.—Petition of J. W. Filder and Others, of Auckland. Petitioners pray that such an alteration may be made in the electoral laws as will enable women to have conferred on them the same rights of franchise as are enjoyed by the male inhabitants of the colony. I am directed to report that, as a Bill dealing with the subject-matter of this petition is now before the House, the Committee has no recommendation to make. 13th May, 1887.

No. 17.—Petition of J. L. Wilson and Others. Petitioners, residents in the City and Province of Auckland, pray that such an alteration may be made in the electoral laws as would enable women to have conferred upon them the same rights of franchise as are enjoyed by the male inhabitants of the colony. I am directed to report that, as a Bill dealing with the subject-matter of this petition is now before the House, the Committee has no recommendation to make. 12th May, 1887.

No. 7.—Petition of Adam Henderson and Joseph Spraggon. Petitioners state that they were the registered owners of the cutter " Sovereign of the Seas;" that in June last she left the Port of Auckland in charge of John Caffrey, bound for the Great Barrier ; that on their arrival there the said John Caffrey, in conjunction with a man named Perm, committed a murder and then sailed away with the cutter; that, the case being one of murder as well as barratry, it was taken up by the police, and petitioners allege that, while waiting the issue of the action taken by the police, they were unable to move on their own behalf; that the cutter was eventually wrecked and the men captured ; that, owing to the neglect of the Government in taking prompt and efficient measures for the recovery of the cutter, petitioners have suffered loss amounting to £500. They pray for relief. I am directed to report that, in the opinion of the Committee, the petitioners have no claim against the colony. 12th May, 1887.

No. 60.—Petition of Victor Nissen, of Otamatea. Petitioner states that in 1882 the Government of New Zealand offered a bonus for the introduction into the colony of ostriches or ostrich-eggs, but that no advantage was taken of the offer, and it lapsed by effluxion of time ; that in January, 1886, he succeeded in introducing into the Auckland Province forty-six young ostriches from South Africa, which are now depasturing on his estate at Otamatea. That he suffered great hardships in the undertaking, and pecuniary loss to such an extent that he is now unable to develop the industry for want of funds. That the said industry will prove of great benefit to the colony. He prays that a bonus or other monetary assistance may be granted to him. I am directed to report that the Committee, in view of the fact that a bonus was offered in 1882 for the introduction of ostriches, and considering that it is an industry which might result in great advantage to the colony, recommend the petition to the favourable consideration of the Government. 19th May, 1887.

No. 33.—Petition of Jessie Kelly, of Port Chalmers. Petitioner states that her late husband, Thomas Kelly, served as a pilot in the Port Chalmers Harbour from 1859 until 1886 — i.e., twenty-seven years, fifteen of which were under the Provincial Government, and twelve under the Otago Harbour Board; that she has received compensation for her husband's services to the Board at the rate of £25 per annum for twelve years, but that said Board refuse to pay compensation on account of the fifteen years during which her husband served the Provincial Government. Petitioner alleges that a further sum of £375 is due to her, being an allowance of £25 per annum for said fifteen years. She prays that this sum may be granted to her. I am directed to report that, in the opinion of this Committee, the petitioner has no claim against the colony. 19th May, 1887. *