(64)

His Excellency's speech, and if the bill has since
reached them, they will have learnt that many of
their complaints have been anticipated, and that,
consequently, much of their opposition had no
just grounds. There is one part of this petition,
however, to which I wish to draw your attention
more particularly, because it exhibits so limited a
view of the question. The petitioners seem to
consider that the Governor of New Zealand has
not been sent out to advance the general benefit
of the settlers-not to carry out a great system of
colonization-but merely to take care of the
natives and the old settlers, who should be allowed
to retain possession of the very large tracts of
country to which some of them lay claim. It is
really matter of regret that the petitioners should
have been so blinded by feelings of self-interest as
to hazard opinions so much at variance with the
fact, and I may safely leave it to the public to
determine what weight or consideration is due to
their judgment. In further confirmation of the
view they take, the petitioners have cited a passage
from a despatch of Lord Normanby, when Colonial
Secretary. It is very difficult to conceive how
the petitioners could imagine that the document to
which they refer could be applied in favor of their
views. A careful reading of the whole of that
despatch would prove to the old settlers that they
were therein described in terms not very flattering
to themselves. It stated that there were amongst
them about 2000 individuals who were either run-
away sailors, or convicts who had absconded from
penal settlements. Another petition is, if possi-
ble, still more mischievous than the one to which
I have already adverted, and the propogation of
such an opinion through the medium of the press,
must have caused general regret. An attempt is
made to impress upon the minds of members of
this Council, and upon the public at large, that
the native population is not only strongly dissa-
tisfied with the proceedings of government, but
entertain an idea, very generally, since the intro-
duction of this measure for settling claims to land,
that they are to be deprived of their own posses-
sions. Than this nothing can possibly be either
more erroneous or mischievous, and I revert to
this portion of the petition with very deep regret,
particularly as on a former occasion, shortly after
the arrival of the governor in this country, an
attempt was made by several Europeans to instil
into the native mind feelings of the same na-
ture. Those parties were known; and, I had
hoped that the injurious and mischievous tendency
of the attempt had been made so fully apparent,
that it would never have been revived. I take this
opportunity of denying, in the most unqualified
terms, the truth of any such reports. They have
not the slightest foundation. The natives are, on
the contrary, perfectly satisfied that no such
intention, on the part of Government, ever existed.
All the communications which the Government
has received from the natives themselves, and from
persons best qualified to form a correct opinion
on the subject, fully disprove the assertion of the
petitioners. The natives do not now, and never
did, entertain an opinion, so far as regards the
Government, of distrust. They have, on the
contrary, shown unbounded confidence in the
justice and fair dealing with which they have hi-
therto been treated, and know that they can rely
on being similarly dealt with for the future.
With regard to the petition of certain inhabitants
of Auckland, read to day, I was glad to learn
from its concluding paragraph, that nearly all the
petitioners require, is provided for in the 19th
clause:

"Whenever the lands validly sold to any claimant, shall
be within any of the districts to be laid out for the selection
of Country Lands, and where the outlay in respect of such
lands, in accordance with the foregoing rule, shall have
amounted to not less than five shillings an acre, such lands,
at the option of the claimant, shall be confirmed by a grant
from the Crown to the claimant thereof, which part shall be
a full satisfaction to the grantee, of all claims arising out of
the purchase of the lands therein comprised."

This clause, it is satisfactory to reflect, if con-
sidered impartially, provides for most of the ob-
jections of the petitioners. Then, again, the
wishes of the petitioners are, in a great measure,
met by the seventh clause, respecting the limita-
tion of lands to be granted absolutely:-

"All lands which shall be reported to have been in actual
cultivation, or whereon any substantial building shall have
been erected on or before the fifth day of January, 1840,
shall be granted absolutely to the persons who shall be found
entitled thereto, according to the provisions of the said re-
cited Ordinance: Provided that no grant to be made under
the foregoing provision, shall comprise any land situate upon
the seashore, within one hundred feet of high water mark,
unless such grant shall be specially authorized by His Ex-
cellency the Governor, with the advice of the Executive
Council. Provided also, that no Grant so to be made shall
in any case comprise any headland, promontory, bay, or
island, which may be required for any purpose of public
utility, or any land which may be required for the site of any
town, or part thereof.

The Council, and the public, could not fail to
see that the clause, in spirit, was so framed, as to
prevent the Governor from refusing to grant water
frontages, or head-lands, bays, and other eligible
sites, unless such were imperatively required "for
any purpose of public utility, or the site of any
town." It was the wish of Government to give
to this part of Her Majesty's instructions as libe-
ral an interpretation as possible;-no place would
be reserved, unless obviously required for the
public benefit. With respect, also, to the districts
to be open for selection by claimants whose lands
might be thus required, it was not intended to sub-
stitute property of little value, as an equivalent
but the stipulated quantity in rich and fertile dis-
tricts, avoiding the tops of hills, and other uneli-
gible situations. The third petition presented,
has certainly been drawn up with great ability.
It admits the general principle of the bill, but
finds fault with some of the details, which appear
to have been misunderstood. It complains that
no adequate instructions have been made for the
guidance of the Commissioners; but on reference
to the bill itself it will be perceived that a part
only of the present Ordinance is proposed to be
repealed. The first clause-the repealing clause-
expressly enacts, that only "so much of the said
Ordinance as relates to the rule by which the
quantity of land to be granted is to be deter-
mined, and so much thereof as empowers His
Excellency the Governor to grant any part of the
particular land claimed, is to be repealed." The
details of the present Bill, for hearing and report-
ing on claims to land are, therefore, still in force.