1-1

16

I am directed to report that, as it appears from the evidence before the Committee that the petitioner's case can again be heard on the production of fresh evidence, and as it further appears that such evidence is available, the Committee do not consider it necessary to make any recommendation. 17th August, 1880. '

No. 132. —Petition of Thomas Eeafcis Satage. The petitioner states that he has been a member of the Armed Constabulary Force since 1873, but> having become ill at Opunake, was transferred to the hospital, and subsequently discharged in September, 1879. He prays that his case be inquired into, and relief afforded him. I am directed to report that the Committee do not consider that the petitioner has any claim for compensation on the colony. 17th August, 1880.

No. 239. —Petition of John Geaham. The petitioner states that he has been illegally proceeded against for a false claim for debt, that the case was disposed of in his absence, and that he was imprisoned by order of the Eesident Magistrate of the Hamilton Court, and unjustly dealt with while in prison. He prays that relief be afforded him. I am directed to report that, as the petitioner has not produced the evidence before the Committee that he says he has at his disposal to sustain his allegations, the Committee cannot recommend his case to the favourable consideration of the House. 17th August, 1880.

No. 261.—Petition of John Teact. The petitioner states that he has suffered serious loss as a contractor owing to the unjust and unfair manner he has been treated by the Public Works Department. Pie prays for inquiry. I am directed to report that, from the evidence before the Committee, it appears that the contractors have received full payment in terms of their contract: the Committee therefore cannot recommend the prayer of the petition. 17th August, 1880.

No. 267. —Petition of W. E. Cole and other Eailway Employes. The petitioners pray that the House will investigate all the circumstances connected with their employment, and not sanction any reduction of their wages, which are only barely sufficient to provide decent maintenance for themselves and families. I am directed to report that, as the subject-matter of this petition is now before the House, the Committee do not consider it necessary to make any recommendation. 17th August, 1880.

No. 82.—Petition of James Eeade. The petitioner states that he leased 25,000 acres of land from the Government, but that he cannot make profitable use of it owing to the trespass of large numbers of Natives and their horses, who camp on the land to search for kauri-gum. He prays that his case be taken into consideration, and relief afforded him. I am directed to report that, no evidence having been offered to the Committee in the petitioner's case, the Committee has no recommendation to make to the House. 17th August, 1880.

No. 116.—Petition of Hugh Dottghebty. The petitioner states that a cottage and acre of land to which he was entitled, at Otahuhu, was taken from him without any just cause. He prays that the cottage and land be restored to him. I am directed to report that there is no evidence before the Committee to show that the petitioner is entitled to compensation, and, as the grievance complained of arose out of alleged injustice sustained in the early days of the settlement of Auckland, the Committee are of opinion that the claim for consideration, if any, has lapsed. 17th August, 1880.

No. 245. —Petition of William Seaele. The petitioner states that there has been a great failure of justice in the case, the Queen v. Yates, tried in the Eesident Magistrate's and Supreme Courts, at Blenheim, by which the defendant was acquitted; and the petitioner has obtained no redress for the great crime committed on his daughter, a child of ten years of age. He prays the House to investigate the case and recommend the Government to institute a new trial. I am directed to report that the Committee do not consider it advisable to inquire into this case, as it has already, in the ordinary course of law, been finally dealt with by the Supreme Court before a jury17th August, 1880.

No. 311. —Petition of Chaeles Thompson and other Ratepayers of the Kaiwarra Road Board District. The petitioners pray that the district of the Kaiwarra Eoad Board be exempted from the operation of the Counties Act, as the duty of maintaining the road and footpaths will be more efficiently performed by the Eoad Board than by the County Council.