5

G—No.-1

21. That Petitioner after the receipt of such letters as aforesaid, according to his engagement remained perfectly passive and towards the end of 1853 Petitioner proceeded to Melbourne, leaving his family resident in New Zealand, trusting to be able to return there when the Government should be in a position to fulfil their contracts with him. 22. That in January, 1855, Petitioner returned to New Zealand, and for the third time proceeded with his family to New Plymouth, but in consequence of Native disturbances found no arrangement could be made and he further found that the Provincial Government, acting under the advice of Mr. C.W. Richmond, then the Provincial Attorney, had framed and published certain Land Regulations 'see New Zealand Government Gazette, 16th December, 1854,) whereby they sought to render the land orders of your Petitioner and other claimants " unavailable and extinguished" unless exchanged for Government Scrip within a limited period, but such particular Regulations were disallowed by the Government in consequence of a memorial from Petitioner and other claimants. 23. That under such circumstances and not wishing to embarrass the Government with the Natives by unduly urging his claim, he again returned to Melbourne, leaving his family in Auckland, and in January, 1857, he again revisited New Zealand when he found that an Act had been passed by the General Assembly during his absence and without any notice, intituled " The Land Orders and Scrip Act, 1856," containing certain clauses which originated with the said Mr. C. W. Richmond then one of the Members for New Plymouth (see Votes and Proceedings, July 23rd, 1856, p. 204) whereby the right of Petitioner and other land claimants to claim their land at Waitara where the Native title might thereafter be extinguished, was taken away and in fact handed over to the Province, each claimant being thereby obliged to accept in lieu of each 50 acre section, one acre of Town land, 12 acres of Suburban, or 50 acres of Rural. 24. That Petitioner remonstrated with the individual Members of the Government on the injustice and illegality of such Act, who excused the same solely on the plea of public expediency, but promised to review the measure on the next meeting of the General Assembly; if the Act was left to its operation by Her Majesty, then represented to be uncertain, and Petitioner then again returned to Melbourne. 25. That in January, 1859, Petitioner returned for the third time to Auckland from Melbourne, when he found that a further Act had been passed during his absence, and without any notice by the General Assembly (21, and 22, Vict. No. 77,) by which the said objectionable clauses of the former Act were re-enacted, but increased compensation given as hereinafter explained. 26. That His Excellency the Governor did not assent to such Bill, but reserved the same for the signification of Her Majesty's pleasure, because as he informed Petitioner be coas'dered its provisions as a confiscation of the rights of the land claimants, and Petitioner then memorialized His Excellency on the subject, who referred such memorial to which Petitioner refers, to His Responsible Ministers, but the Royal assent was ultimately given and proclaimed, on the 22nd July, 1859. 27. That, whilst the said Act was in progress through the Legislative Council, Mr. Fred. A. Carrington, who in his own behalf, and as agent for Messrs. Tunno, Dunne, and others, claimed to be entitled, to the greater portion of the block now known as Teira's Block, remonstrated with the Hon. C. W. Richmond thereon, and threatened to memorialize the Colonial Government and the Imperial Parliament if the same were persisted in, when the Hon. C. W. Richmond represented to him that the Waitara land would not be acquired by the authorities, in order to be handed ever to the land claimants on account of the great expense necessary for the purpose, and he urged the injury that would thus accrue to the settlement founded by the said Mr. Carrington and its settlers if he persisted in his opposition, and the said F. A. Carrington, entirely influenced by such representations, was induced to accept the increased terms of compensation then expressly agreed on between them, namely 37j acres Suburban land instead of 12 acres, and 75 Rural acres instead of 50 acres, and the said C. W. Richmond then represented, that efforts should be made to acquire the Waitara lan d, and that a Town should be laid out thereat, where the one acre of Town land to be given as compensation at the option of the claimants might be selected, 28. That the said Mr. Richmond obtained from the said Mr. Carrington an official letter, whereby he recorded his consent to such arrangement, which he still has in his possession or power, and under such circumstances the Act was proceeded with and passed, but although the necessity for written consent on the part of land claimants was then recognised, no communication whatever was held with Petitioner on the subject although known to be in Melbourne, and he has only recently been informed of such arrangement with the said Mr. Carrington. 29. That since the passing of such Act, the Government of the Colony has proceeded to acquire land at the Waitara for the benefit of the Province. 30. That Petitioner respectfully submits, that the provisions of such Act are not only unjust but contrary to law, for the following reasons. 1. That the award of Her Majesty's Commissioner ascertained and fixed with the force of a judicial decision, the liability of the Crown to extinguish the Native title to such lands, and so to enable the New Zealand Company and its assigns to perform its contracts, and that such was the character of the said award, has been recently admitted by the Responsible Ministry of New Zealand, who have expressly insisted thereon, in and by their memorandum on the Taranaki question, dated 28th December, 1860, p. 4, signed C. W. Richmond. 2, That such liability has been recognised as before stated, not only by successive Colonial Secretaries but also in the particular instance of Petitioner's claims, always treated as a promise or engagement made on behalf of Her Majesty, which the Governor of New Zealand, Sir George Grey, had power and was bound to fulfil.