440

there does seem to be some misunderstanding as to the necessity for punctuality in meeting these engagements. It would surely be an aspersion of the character of these men to assume that there is any wish or intention to repudiate their obligations. Your Committee are of opinion that such a state of matters might be in a great measure avoided in future contracts by a more clear definition of the engagement at the time of entering upon it, and by more prompt enforcement at the due date. They would recommend the adoption of a form of promissory note, having the date of maturity distinctly embodied, in lieu of the present somewhat curiously constructed accepted Bill of Exchange, "on demand," with accompanying promise of postponement. Under any arrangement, there will probably be a certain percentage of loss of public money by non-payment of bills, but beyond that your Committee do not apprehend any evil consequences from the existence of such Bills, provided the obligations they represent are fully and distinctly set forth and promptly enforced, more than from other obligations of payment to Government for taxes, &c. Serious consequences will, however, certainly ensue from any vagueness admitted into the obligation.

In reference to the proposed system of Special Settlements and Free Grants of Land, your Committee have in the first place to remark that its adoption involves the complete abandonment of the principles upon which assisted immigration has heretofore been conducted, the most prominent of which are—First, to avoid bringing out people "in forma pauperis," but simply to make a temporary advance, which can be availed of without compromise of independence and self-respect. Secondly, to confine such assistance to such persons as must of necessity on arrival go into the labor market, and by that means bestow a benefit upon the community, which goes as a return for the benefit obtained in an assisted passage. Your Committee find further objections to the proposed system as follow:—That under it many persons would be induced to come from the home country under an erroneous estimate of the value of a piece of land based upon their experience there, who would suffer great disappointment and exhibit discontent on finding that in the Colony such a piece of land was valueless until capital and colonial experience had been acquired. That for a superior class of immigrants, possessing capital and agricultural skill, such an inducement is unnecessary, as it would suffice for their purpose that land might be purchased at a cheap rate, while the extent of such Grants would be altogether insufficient for their purpose; that men landing from shipboard with Land orders, would be apt to squat at once upon their sections of Land, and thus to enter upon a life of indolence and poverty which would leave them after a year or two in a worse position than if they had at once entered the labor market and so acquired the aptitude as well as the means for settling; that the mere bestowal of a small piece of Land would not suffice to fix in the Colony persons who, from other considerations, might desire to move away, while to the man who possessed on arrival, or who subsequently acquired the means and aptitude for settling as a small farmer, the possession of a piece of Land upon such a tenure as proposed under the Free Grant System would be of no immediate value, as it would be mere folly for him to invest his all upon a property which might become forfeited by an unforeseen necessity if absenting himself from the Colony, and which in case of need he could neither sell nor raise money upon; that in appointing agents in various parts of the Home country the advantages of the present agency, which in point of efficiency is second to none in the United Kingdom, would be lost, and it would be impossible to obtain the same careful selection of Emigrants, while there would be the danger, or rather the certainty, of obtaining a large proportion of an inferior class, such as would be destructive of the character hitherto maintained by this settlement; that in Auckland, the only part of New Zealand where the Free Grant System has been tried, its success is very questionable, while in the opinion of Mr. Forsaith, a colonist of long experience in Auckland, the result has been confirmatory of the views of your Committee above expressed; and finally, that in the opinion of your Committee the introduction of such a system would be unsuited to this Province, and distasteful to the people. Apart from all these considerations, there is yet another which in the humble judgment of your Committee is of