an official letter of Lord Aberdeen, the British foreign secretary, to Mr Everett, minister to England, dated the 10th February, 1844, he says:

[Extract.]

Lord Aberdeen to Mr. Everett.

The undersigned, Her Majesty's principal secretary of state for foreign affairs, had the honour in his note of the 3d ultimo to inform Mr. Everett, envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of the United States of America, that he had referred to Her Majesty's principal secretary of state for the colonies Mr. Everett's note of the 26th of December last, relative to the complaints brought forward by several American citizens concerning the position in which they are placed in Her Majesty's colony of New Zealand with respect to the recognition of certain of their titles to lands in that colony, (got) before the assertion

* * *

of Her Majesty's sovereignty of those islands. Having now received an answer from the colonial department, the undersigned has the honour to inform Mr. Everett, with reference to the first head of complaint, that, in consequence of certain questions raised by the American consul at Sidney as to the rights and obligations of aliens in New Zealand, instructions were forwarded to the governor of that island in the month of March, 1841, upon which occasion that officer was directed to bear in mind the principle that where aliens had acquired land from the chiefs prior to the proclamation of the Queen's sovereignty there, and that fact was undisputed, the claims should be acknowledged; but that where a doubt arose whether the alien made a bona fide purchase of the land, the settler should be treated as any British subject, and his claim disposed of accordingly.

To this arrangement Her Majesty's Government have since announced their determination to adhere, on the occasion of a reference being made by the governor of New Zealand, on an application from a Belgian settler relative to the claims of the subjects of foreign powers to land. * Trusting that these explanations may be satisfactory, the undersigned requests Mr. Everett to accept the assurances of his distinguished consideration.

*

*

ABERDEEN.

If the British Government maintain "their determination to adhere" to this arrangement, the only open question in Webster's claim is whether his purchases were made in good faith. The fact of his purchase, the execution of the deeds, the subsequent affirmations of the chiefs made before the commission that they conveyed the lands in good faith and for a valuable consideration, are matt r's that have either been undisputed or are settled in his favour, as will be presently shown. But it is worth while to consider, before proceeding further, whether the British Crown has any title, under the terms of the treaty of the 6th February, 1840, to any lands previously conveyed by the chiefs to Webster, even if such conveyances are void, or may be avoided, for fraud. The Government, without having passed upon the question mentioned in the instructions of the foreign office to the governor of New Zealand in February, 1844, and without having settled any question connected with Webster's legal or equitable rights, has sold or disposed of all his lands as Crown lands. He has had no day in court, and his lands have been confiscated without a hearing and without notice.

If the conveyances to Webster were not bona fide, his possession of the land was the continuing possession of the defrauded chiefs, and their possession under the terms of the treaty reduced the interest of the Crown in these lands to a mere right of preemption at a price to be agreed upon. Such a privilege of preëmption gave the Crown no title to these lands until it had purchased them; and its seizure and sale of them was a wrong to the chiefs if Webster had defrauded them, or to Webster if he had honestly acquired the lands.

But the sale of these lands by the Government was, virtually, a final denial of all title in Webster, and closed all courts and tribunals to his legal or equitable demands. Here is a wrong done to an American citizen by the Government of Great Britain, by means of which its treasury has been replenished, and its courts are effectually closed against all redress. The question has, therefore, ceas d to be one between a citizen of the United States and any citizen of New Zealand found in possession of the lands which could be settled either in the colonial or the British courts. It is a question to which the Government of Great Britain has made itself a party by claiming the lands of an American citizen, and by seizing them and selling them contrary to its own treaty and laws. This was also

done contrary to its solemn pledge, given to the United States by Lord Aberdeen, that, "where aliens had acquired lands from the chiefs prior to the proclamation of the Queen's sovereignty there, and that fact was undisputed, the claims should be acknowledged," unless they were not obtained in good faith.

This situation is one that seems to demand the intervention of the Government of the United States. That Webster's claims have been refused consideration upon the state of facts that attended their origin, and should have controlled their decision, is entirely apparent, according to the record evidence in this case. Webster's claims seem to have received no other consideration than that indicated in a letter to him from the governor of New Zealand, which is as follows: Hamilton to Webster.*

GOVERNMENT HOUSE, 10th May, 1845.

SIR: I am directed by the governor to acquaint you that his excellency has examined and taken advice respecting your land claims, marked 305H and 3051, and is sorry to find himself precluded from authorizing any further grant made to you at present, on account of the largeness of the grants already made in your

name.

The governor directs me to say that the land which you now hold in undisputed possession will probably be granted to you eventually.

I have, &c.,

J. W. HAMILTON,
Private Secretary.

It is very clear that, while this enunciation of the governor of New Zealand was intended as an indefinite postponement of all further consideration of Webster's claims, it held out to him the hope that some future indulgence might be accorded to him, as an act of grace, in respect of "the lands which you now hold in undisputed possession." Neither the New Zealand natives nor any other person claimed to hold possession of these lands when the treaty of the 6th February, 1840, was made, or before that time, under any claim or colour of title, or of occupancy, that was adverse to the possession of William Webster.

The governor of New Zealand, in the communication above copied, stated his decision that" claims marked '305H' and '3051'"were disallowed for the present, and all other grants made to Mr. Webster, "on account of the largeness of the grants already made in your [Webster's] name." This refusal to confirm "grants made to" Webster was not attempted to be justified on the ground that "land claims marked '305H' and '3051'" were not in the "undisputed possession" of Webster, but solely on the ground of "the largeness of the grants already made in your [Webster's] name.' Then follows the promise, that has not been kept in any sense, that the land which you now hold in undisputed possession will probably be granted to you eventually."

This was the manner in which the governor of New Zealand complied with the instructions of the British Government as they are stated in the letter above quoted of Lord Aberdeen to Mr. Everett. The disposal thus made of the rights of an American citizen was a mockery of justice and a contemptuous disobedience of the instructions of the Government of Great Britain. That Government, however, at a later date made itself responsible for this summary and unjust disposition of the rights of Mr. Webster, as will appear from a copy of correspondence annexed to this report, marked "Appendix No. 2.”

On the 17th November, 1874, Earl Carnarvon, Her Majesty's principal secretary of state for the colonies, cut down all hope of Mr. Webster's success in getting his rights growing out of the assurance made to him by the governor of New Zealand on the 18th March, 1845, that the lands of which he held undisputed possession would be granted to him eventually.

Earl Carnarvon, replying to a letter of Mr. C. L. Duncan, through his secretary, said: "Lord Carnarvon desires me to inform you that, this matter having been most carefully inquired into, the only conclusion which his lordship can come to is that not only has Mr. Webster no claim to compensation, but that he has been treated throughout with exceptional liberality."

As Mr. Webster never got an acre of land in New Zealand from all the extensive purchases he made from the chiefs, and as the British Government seized

*There are some errors in this letter: among others 3051 should read 305J, which relates to the claim of Mercury Island; 3051 related to a claim for land at Waiheke Island, which was not dis allowed. For accurate copy of letter, see ante, page 84.

and sold all the lands conveyed to him by the chiefs for his own use and benefit, in which British subjects were not interested, it becomes impossible to find any ground for the statement of Lord Carnarvon that he "not only had no claim to compensation, but that he had been treated with exceptional liberality." There is no other possible ground for this statement except the statement made by the governor of New Zealand in his letter to Mr. Webster, dated the 10th March, 1845, as to "the largeness of the grants already made in your Webster's] name." The facts which explain this statement are as follows: While Mr. Webster was engaged in purchasing lands from the chiefs, some of his friends in Austra lia, who were British subjects, employed him to purchase several tracts of land— in all about fifteen thousand acres-for them. They furnished the means, and he took the titles in his own name, being on terms of peculiar friendship with the chiefs, and afterwards admitted the rights of those British subjects in the presence of the commission, who proceeded to confirm the titles to them.

These facts were all made known to the commission by Webster when he ap peared before them and proved his deeds by the chiefs and others. All the titles made by the chiefs to Webster, and by Webster admitted to be for the benefit of British subjects, were confirmed by the commission. The conveyances made by the chiefs to Webster, in the same deeds and for his own use, have been refused confirmation" on account of the largeness of the grants already made in your name."

Thus his faithful dealing with British subjects was made the pretext for the final denial of his rights; and titles that came through him from the chiefs for the benefit of British subjects were confirmed, while titles that came to him from the same chiefs, included in the same bodies of land and under the same conveyances, have been ignored; and his part of said lands has been seized and sold by the British Government. This is the present situation of the claim of William Webster to compensation from the British Government for his lands in New Zealand, taken and sold by its authority.

Aside from the influence of the principles of international law, which would secure rights of property to private persons in any country the sovereignty of which passed to a new ruler by cession and treaty-by purchase and not by conquest-the terms of the treaty with the tribal chiefs compel the conclusion that no title to the soil of New Zealand passed to Great Britain where the same sovereign power had formerly granted the same land to a citizen of the United States.

But the principles recognized recently in the Berlin conference as to the free state of the Congo, and in other instances, are only consistent with the right of the chiefs of any tribe, however savage, to cede lands to private persons and societies. The sovereignty of a tribe being admitted, all question as to their right to convey their lands disappears. This is conspicuously true as to the New Zea land chiefs, whose rights are expressly admitted in the treaty of cession and merge into the British colonial system, and upon which treaty every land title in the colony is distinctly based, whether accruing to the Crown or to British subjects.

No complaint has been made by the British Government that Mr. Webster has omitted anything required to properly secure his titles to these lands, or that he has ever done anything to forfeit them. He insists that his rights have been overslaughed because of his repeated refusals to renounc› his allegiance to the United States and to become a British subject. However true this may be, it is true that lands conveyed to him by the New Zealand chiefs have been confirmed by the authorities to British subjects for whom he purchased them, and thus it is a reasonable conclusion that his foreign citizenship has caused discrimination against his rights that is neither just nor defensible.

Mr. Webster deserved, at the hands of Great Britain and all other civilized people, better treatment. When he was quite a young man he went to New Zealand with a capital of $6,000, invested in goods suited to trade with that people. He purchased the right to set up a trading-station at Coromandel from the native chiefs. He was the first white man who settled there, or at any point nearer to that place than the Bay of Islands, 150 miles from Coromandel. Pursuing his policy of friendly intercourse with the natives, and learning to speak their language fluently, he soon largely increased his capital by exchanging pork, which he bought from the natives, and ship-timber and other native productions, for such articles as they needed, which he imported to that country. He bought a cape of land from the native chiefs on or near the present site of Auckland, and built houses and established a trading station there. He was the first white man who settled there, or within a great distance from that point.

As his business increased he purchased other locations and established other trading stations. He established a shipyard at which he built small coasting vessels, in which he entered the shallow bays along the coasts and ascended the rivers to open trade with the natives. In this way he was largely instrumental in bringing the natives into friendly relations with each other, and in diverting their attention from savage warfare to peaceful pursuits. He was the real pioneer of civilization in that section of the country, and was followed by colonies of English people to whom he had opened the way to the interior of the islands. At Great Barrier Island there was then a whaling station much resorted to by fishermen, and Mr. Webster sought to convey it to the United States as a valuable acquisition. His letter containing this offer is set forth in Appendix No. 1. His lands and other property in New Zealand were worth a sum which he estimates at a million dollars at the date of the treaty with Great Britain. When, later, he had been deprived of his property and returned to the United States to assert his rights, he was reduced to poverty.

In a letter dated the 4th November, 1840, by Mr. Webster to I. H. Williams, United States consul at Sydney, New South Wales, and set forth in Appendix 1, he called attention to the proceedings of the British Government in reference to the lands purchased by American citizens, and asked the consul "to make it known to the American Government as early as possible." In the conclusion of his letter he says: "They have not taken any of my lands as yet, but I expect they will take all from me and every other American unless our Government will take it in hand to stop it."

This was the only suggestion Mr. Webster made that he desired any intervention by the United States until September, 1858. His letter had no relation to any indemnity for loss and damage for lands that had been, or were expected to be, sequestered by the British Government. It only had reference to getting titles to his lands, and those of other American citizens, which he feared that the British authorities might refuse to recognize and confirm.

On the 30th January, 1841,* Mr. Webster wrote to the colonial secretary of New Zealand, and sent him copies of his land titles to seven tracts, and seven statements of his purchases, which he asked should be laid "before the commissioners for examination only." He offered in this letter to come before the commissioners and prove all his purchases. He concluded this letter, which is copied in appendix 1, as follows: "All of it was bought before Her Majesty's government was formed here, and I further consider that all I have has been dearly earned; and I trust that before I am dispossessed of any of it it will be proved who has the best right to it."

The letter of Mr. Webster to Mr. Williams was sent by the latter to our Department of State. On the 14th June, 1858, the Senate, by resolution, called on the President for information as to the claim of William Webster relating to his lands in New Zealand. Replying to that resolution, the President sent to the Senate the statement called a report" from the Secretary of State in the following form:

66

[Message of the President of the United States, communicating, in answer to a resolution of the Senate requesting a list of claims of citizens of the United States against foreign governments, a report of the Secretary of State.]

To the Senate of the United States :

In compliance with the resolution of the Senate of the 14th June last, requesting a list of claims of citizens of the United States on foreign governments, I transmit a report from the Secretary of State, with the documents which accompanied it.

WASHINGTON, 19th January, 1859.

JAMES BUCHANAN.

*The proper date is 20th July, 1841. The letter is printed on page 62, ante.

Names of such complainants, citizens of United States, as have preferred complaints or claims against foreign governments to the Executive Departments of the Government for aggressions or spoliations, or other demands against such governments.