abandoned any further attempt to get redress by direct appeal to the British Government, returned home, and has now presented his memorial to Congress. A copy of this memorial was handed to the Secretary by the Hon. S. S. Cox, chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, with request for information upon which this report is called for. The facts above summarized, not in chronological or any methodical order, for I could not well observe either, are brought together for the twofold purpose of showing the history of the claim, and its present status. I have in this statement carefully avoided the argumentative features of the claimant's narrative, and omitted as far as possible the deductions which he makes, although these latter are by no means unreasonable or illogi cal from his standpoint. I find from these facts and circumstances, supported as I think they are by ample documentary and circumstantial proofs, the following facts and conclusions:

I. That Webster is a native-born citizen of the United States, and that he has never done any act nor taken steps looking to a change of his nationality or that in any way impairs his rights as an American citizen.

II. That he purchased the lands in New Zealand, which he claims in his memorial, from the proprietary chiefs of that country for valuable consideration. III. That the proprietary as well as the sovereign rights of the native chiefs and rulers of New Zealand were formally admitted and acknowledged and recognized by the British Government prior to the acquisition of the country by Great Britain.

The Marquis of Normanby, in his dispatch (No. 1) of the 14th of August, 1839, to Captain Hobson, lieutenant-governor, says: "I have already stated that we acknowledge New Zealand as a sovereign and independent state, so far, at least, as it is possible to make that acknowledgment in favor of a people composed of numerous dispersed and petty tribes who possess few political relations to each other, and are incompetent to act or even to deliberate in concert. But the admission of their rights, though inevitably qualified by this consideration, is binding on the faith of the British Crown. The Queen, in common with Her Majesty's immediate predecessor, disclaims, for herself and her subjects, every pretention to seize on the island of New Zealand, or to govern them as a part of the dominions of Great Britain, unless the free and intelligent consent of the nations expressed according to their established usages shall be first obtained." IV. That the cession above referred to by the chiefs of New Zealand to the British Crown was made by the treaty of the 6th of February, 1840.

V. That Webster's purchases of the land claimed by him were all made from the same and other chiefs prior to such cession to Great Britain, and that the instruments of conveyance which he exhibits are equally good in form and solemn in character with the treaty itself.

66

VI. That the right of foreigners to lands thus purchased from the native chiefs was recognized by the British Government. Lord Aberdeen, in his note of the 10th of February, 1844, to Mr. Everett, says: Instructions were forwarded to the governer of that Island, in the month of March, 1841, upon which occasion that officer was directed to bear in mind the principle that when aliens had acquired land from the chiefs, prior to the proclamation of the Queen's sovereignty there, and that fact was undisputed, the claim should be acknowledged."

VII. That there is no suggestion in the whole history of the case that Webster's purchases were not bona fide and for a valuable, and, at that time, sufficient consideration; and further, that throughout the whole proceedings there is not found an intimation or reflection against his personal character for integrity, truthfulness, and fair dealing.

VIII. That, notwithstanding the above acknowledgment of Lord Aberdeen for his Government, the extensive and valuable tracts of land thus purchased by Webster have been taken possession of and appropriated to the uses of the Crown by the British authorities in New Zealand, the only exceptions being the few small tracts selected here and there through the island, which went to make up the five thousand acres confirmed to Mr. Ranulph Dacre, a British subject.

IX. That Webster made use of every reasonable and available means, both with the colonial and home authorities of Great Birtain, to secure repossession of his lands, or a money indemnity for their loss, but without avail.

X. That while the general question to land titles held in New Zealand by American citizens, was, in 1841 to 1844, made the subject of correspondence between the United States legation at London and the British foreign office, no correspondence took place with regard to Webster's claim (see Mr. Fish's report to Congress, ante); that Webster was then pursuing his remedies directly with the British home and colonial governments. That he presented no claim to this

Government until 1858, and that consequently the report made in this Department in September of that year was based on a misaprenhension of the real facts, and should not be allowed to operate to his prejudice.

XI. That Mr. Secretary Fish, when he made his adverse memorandum (May 11, 1869), must have been misled by this 1858 report or by a failure to furnish him the true antecedent facts of the case as they existed in the Department; that Webster's case can not properly be considered barred by the terms of the convention of 1853, inasmuch as it not only had not been brought to the attention of the Department at that date, but, moreover, had not then accrued, and therefore that this action should not prejudice the claim.

In Secretary Seward's letter of the 26th of January, 1869, in reference to the Johnson-Clarendon treaty.

XII. That Webster's claim for indemnity against the Government for the value of his lands and other property, of which he was deprived, without warrant of right or law, with the increments arising from improvement, enhancement of value, etc., is a just and subsisting claim, and one that presents just grounds for the interposition of his own Government. The reason assigned by the New Zealand governor for the nonrecognition of Mr. Webster's New Zealand land titles can hardly be called either just or reasonable. Here it is:

"His excellency has examined and taken advice respecting your land claims, 305 H and 305 I, 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."

Webster's legal title to the several tracts, making altogether about 500,000 acres, was equally valid with that to the 5,000 acres recognized, and which he had previously sold or disposed to a British subject; but, says Captain Hobson, the estate was too large in area. This of itself from a British standpoint sounds like a bit of humor. There are plenty of Australian estates of British subjects much larger in acreage and value, and not a few even in the limited space of the United Kingdom. If the money value enters into his excellency's estimate of the "largeness" of the Webster estate, then examples are numerous of the acquisition and possession of much more valuable land estates by British subjects in Australia and India, and are not wanting even in the United States. No one can read the history of this claim as presented in the simple facts without being struck with the enterprise and business capacity of the claimant; and it is also to be noticed to his credit that, during his somewhat romantic career in New Zealand, he secured and maintained the unqualified esteem and confidence of the native chiefs and people. He increased the value of his large property by vast improvements in docks, harbors, and dwellings, and, as it now turns out, rendered very essential service to the British Government by stimulating those natives, who have now become British subjects, to habits of industry and ways of civilization.

His claim is large in amount and might at first glance seem exaggerated, but that fact, even if true, furnishes no just reason for denying it consideration. It is a common objection to most private claims against governments. It is, however, unnecessary to discuss that question here, as it will be more properly a question for consideration in the prosecution of such measures, if any, as may be adopted, looking to a final adjustment of the claim. Respectfully submitted.

HENRY O'CONOR.

[House Report No. 1787, Forty-sixth Congress, second session.]

The Committee on Foreign Affairs, to whom was referred the joint resolution in relation to the petition, etc., of William Webster, a native-born citizen of the United States, who seeks the aid of the Government of the United States in furtherance of his claim against the Government of Great Britain, having had the same under consideration, submit the following report:

The joint resolution referred to this committee on the 9th day of February, 1880, is as follows:

"Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the petition of William Webster and the accompanying papers be transmitted to the executive department, with the request that the President take such steps as in his opinion may be proper and in accordance with international law, to secure to the said William Webster a final settlement and adjustment of his claim against the Government of Great Britain

in relation to the sequestration of the lands and property in New Zealand claimed by said William Webster, an American citizen, by purchase of the native chiefs of that country before its cession to and occupation by the Government of Great Britain."

The committee called on Hon. William M. Evarts, Secretary of State, and handed him the papers in the case, and by the Secretary's direction all the information upon the records and files of his Department relating to the claim of Webster was furnished to your committee and is embraced in this report.

[Information received from the Department of State.]

Claim of William Webster, a citizen of the United States, against the British Government.

Memorial and papers handed to Secretary by the Hon. S. S. Cox, April, 1880. This claim has been formally before the Department since September, 1858, when a printed memorial, with accompanying papers, was referred for examination by President Buchanan. Notice of the occurrences from which the claim arises was, however, brought to the attention of the Department by a letter of the 23d of February, 1841, from J. H. Williams, esq., then United States consul at Sydney, New South Wales. Mr. Williams, in this letter, which was received October following, simply states that he transmits a copy of a letter addressed to him by Mr. William Webster, for the Secretary's perusal, and then leaves Webster to tell his own story. Webster, in the letter referred to, states that he is a citizen of the United States, a native of Maine; that he first went to New Zealand in 1835, and being pleased with the country, remained there, and that during the succeeding five years he devoted himself to purchasing and improving and cultivating land and teaching the natives the arts of civilization; that he made his purchases of the several tracts, shown on the map which accompanied his letter, from the native chiefs, and that he expended in such purchases £15,627, about $78,000. The total of the land amounts to five hundred thousand acres. In addition to this, he alleges that he expended large sums in making improvements, building wharves, improving harbors, and erecting houses. In 1840 the British Government acquired possession and sovereignty of the island by treaty concluded with certain chiefs, and from that New Zealand became a British colonial possession. Capt. William Hobson, royal navy, was appointed lieutenant-governor of the province, and under instructions from the Marquis of Normanby, then secretary for the colonies, immediately proceeded to put in force such regulations as were prescribed by the home Government in relation to the people, natives and foreigners, then inhabiting the island. By a proclamation, bearing date the 30th of January, 1840, the governor makes known the disposition of the government with respects to land titles. It is found on pages 12-13 of the annexed pamphlet.

1st. Her Majesty, taking into consideration the present as well as future interests of her subjects and also the rights of the chiefs and native tribes, does not deem it expedient to recognize as valid any titles to lands which are not derived from or confirmed by Her Majesty.

2d. But, in order to dispel any apprehensions that it is intended to dispossess the owners of land acquired on equitable conditions and not in extent or otherwise prejudicial to the present or prospective interests of the community, a commission is appointed, with certain powers to be derived from the governor and legislative council of New South Wales, to inquire into and report on all claims to such lands, and all persons having such claims will be required to prove the same before the said commission when appointed.

The treaty by which the British Government acquired title to New Zealand is dated the 6th of February, 1840, some days, as it is seen, after the above proclamation. Nothing is said in the proclamation about Americans or other nonBritish subjects, or what, if any, course the new government intended to pursue in regard to their land titles. There were many Americans besides Webster, and all of them refused to recognize the legality of the proposed commission. It was under this condition of things that Mr. Webster addressed his letter to Consul Williams, as the most certain and convenient way of bringing the facts to the notice of the Government of the United States, not as to himself alone, but as to all Americans similarly situated. He, however, formulated no claim at that time, and made no demand for indemnity, for, as he states himself, he had not then been despoiled of his lands.

The British authorities took possession of the most valuable of Mr. Webster's lands. He got none, although there was a quasi recognition of his title by the

so-called land commission in the fact that, in 1858, the New Zealand government confirmed to Mr. Ranulph Dacre five thousand acres of land, which he (Dacre) had purchased from Webster in 1844. Besides the loss of his lands, Mr. Webster claims to have suffered large losses from interference with his business, especially shipping. He had then several vessels, both in the coasting and foreign trade. În 1858, after all efforts to get his claims to the land recognized had failed, both in New South Wales and in England, he brought his claims before this Government, Reverdy Johnson, A. Anderson, and J. W. Denver being then his counsel. His memorial was addressed to the President and referred to the State Department. A memorandum is found, dated the 15th of September of that year, headed "Report," but not signed by any one, which appears to be all the action taken by the Department at that time in relation to the matter.

The claim was again brought to the attention of the Department in May, 1869, and on that occasion there is another memorandum of the Secretary, in Mr. Fish's own handwriting, dated May 11, which, like the report without signature of 1858, is adverse to the claim.

In the summer of 1876 a resolution passed the House of Representatives, calling upon the President for correspondence in regard to Mr. Webster's claim between the Department and the Government of Great Britain. On the 13th of July of that year this resolution was answered, and Mr. Fish, in his letter, says: "No correspondence has taken place between the Department of State and the Government of Great Britain in relation to the sequestration of the lands and property in New Zealand claimed by William Webster, an American citizen. In the years 1841 to 1844 certain correspondence was had between the legation in London and the foreign office of Great Britain in reference to the general question of the land titles held in New Zealand by American citizens, but no correspondence has taken place in regard to the particular claim of William Webster." A copy of that correspondence* is inclosed, and its consists of

1st. A letter of the 26th of December, 1843, from Mr. Everett to Lord Aberdeen.

2d. A brief reply from his lordship, of the 3d of January following, saying the subject had been referred to the secretary for the colonies.

3d. A note of the 10th of February, 1844, from Lord Aberdeen to Mr. Everett, conveying the reply of his Government, the chief point of which is the following: That, in consequence of certain questions raised by the American consul at Sydney 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."

The following letter from Mr. Secretary Seward, of January 26, 1869, which appears to have been transmitted to Congress with the above correspondence, is deemed pertinent to the conclusions reached in this report:

"I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 15th relating to claims of citizens of the United States growing out of occupation of the islands of New Zealand by the authorities of Great Britain in 1840, and suggesting the incorporation of a clause in respect to such claims in the convention for the general adjustment of private claims between this Government and that of Great Britain. In reply, I have to state that it would be inexpedient, in my judgment, to attempt any modification in the convention relating to claims, which is now awaiting ratification, and that it will be preferable, if the provisions of that convention shall be found insufficient to admit the examination of the claims to which you refer, that they should be made the subject of separate and independent negotiations at another time."

With reference to what proceedings were had before the British land commission sitting at Auckland touching Webster's titles or claims, there are no means of ascertaining their nature or the mode of procedure. The following letter, bearing date the 10th of March, 1845, from Governor Hobson's (Fitzroy's) private secretary to Mr. Webster, and which is attached to Mr. Webster's memorial as an exhibit, will convey some idea of the result, so far as their proceedings affected Webster:

*See pages 133 to 135.

SIR: I am desired by the governor to acquaint you that his excellency has examined and taken advice respecting your land claims marked 305 H and 305 I, 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 the honor to be, sir, your most obedient servant,

J. W. HAMILTON,
Private Secretary.

And the following, three days later, from the same source, shows that while Webster did not sleep on his rights, his watchfulness availed him little in securing from the colonial authorities either respect for or a recognition of those rights which he, at least, and not without reason, conceived to be well established:

GOVERNMENT HOUSE,
Auckland, March 13, 1845.

SIR: I am desired by the governor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 10th instant, in reference to "spars" taken for the use of Her Majesty's navy by Commander Wood, of Her Majesty's storeship Tortoise, from off land in the Bay of Plenty, to which, at the time, you laid claim.

In answer to your claim for compensation, I am desired by the governor to say that he will refer the case for the decision of the home Government, being unable himself to do anything at present.

I have the honor to be, sir,

Mr. W. WEBSTER, Auckland.

J. W. HAMILTON,
Private Secretary.

One other fact is proper to state here. In his memorial, presented to the President in 1858, Mr. Webster ex hibits copy of his title deeds from the chiefs from whom he purchased for the several tracts of land to which he laid claim, and which appear very distinctly marked and described by metes and bounds on a map which also accompanied the memorial referred to, and which is annexed as a part of this report.

Soon after the report of Mr. Secretary Fish to the House of Representatives (July 1876), Mr. Webster, with a view to the prosecution of legal remedies in the courts of Great Britain, laid his case before eminent counsel in New York. From the Hon. J. W. Edmonds he had already, in 1861, obtained a written opinion, a printed copy of which is hereto appended. Upon the advice_received still more recently from lawyers equally distinguished he proceeded to London, and there submitted the case to a learned English barrister. He was advised that the home courts had no original jurisdiction in the matter; that any legal proceedings contemplated must be commenced in the New Zealand tribunals, and that the case could reach the home courts of Great Britain only, if at ali, by appeal from the colonial decisions. He next, through the interpo