Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Maori Deeds of Old Private Land Purchases in New Zealand, From the Year 1815 to 1840, with Pre-Emptive and Other Claims

(7.) How the Claims have been disposed of

(7.) How the Claims have been disposed of.

The return shows in a short form the actual settlement of each case, at whatever period or under whatever regulations it was settled. These settlements were of the most varied character, and often took place without the authority of law. One Commissioner who had not investigated a claim reversed the decision of another Commissioner who had; one Governor made his own awards without regard to the decisions of any Commissioner; another Governor laid down rules of his own for the settlement of claims; the Government, at its pleasure granted scrip or money in exchange for the claimant's interest or in compensation for his outlay; the Secretary of State often interfered, and gave decisions in England; the Supreme Court was in several cases applied to, and even the Privy Council was appealed to for final judgment. In this way a mass of decisions came to be made upon varying and often conflicting principles, or rather under circumstances which precluded the application of any principle at all; and it is not to be wondered at, as it certainly cannot be denied, that some injustice was the result.

It was the policy of the Legislature in 1856 to exclude all lapsed or settled cases from being reopened, and thereby to validate for practical purposes all the decisions made by former Governments; but this did not prevent numbers of the claimants interested in those decisions from bringing cases before me, and urging that they were not in reality excluded by the Act. The consequence has been that I have had not only to inquire into those cases which were allowed to be investigated by the Act, but I have had to make myself master of every one of the claims in order to see whether each was excluded or not; for I admitted everybody whose claim had lapsed to show cause why it should not be treated as having lapsed by his own default.

The object I have for my own part chiefly aimed at has been a reasonable uniformity of principle in giving decisions. Taking as a rule for my guidance the desire constantly expressed in both Houses during the discussions of 1856 that a liberal interpretation should be given to the Act, I have in every case awarded as much as I felt empowered to do, and have sincerely endeavoured to satisfy the claimants while I guarded the public interest. I am bound to add that in almost every case I have been met by the claimants in a spirit which reflected the highest credit upon their fairness and moderation, and without which on their part it would have been impossible for me to carry out the law with any success.