1844, as are referred to in the preceding deed, for 125 acres at Coromandel and 5,000 at Piako; and reciting that, by mortgage dated 1st January, 1845, Edward Chalmers, Jeremiah Nagle, William Webster, and Peter Abercrombie, and also William Abercrombie, John Mackay, and Charles Abercrombie, had conveyed certain lands in New Zealand to Campbell and Smith, to secure debts and advances (subject to proviso for redemption); and reciting that Campbell and Smith were desirous of having such advances further secured: Witnesses that, in consideration of such advances, Peter Abercrombie conveys the two above-mentioned parcels of land to Campbell and Smith, subject to such proviso and powers as were contained in the said mortgage of 1st January, 1845.

[NOTE. The mortgage of 1st January, 1845, is not with the other deeds in Whitaker and Heale's bundle of papers relating to their claims. It is immaterial, however, except as to Peter Abercrombie's right to Kopu.]

(This mortgage has now been exhibited by Frederick Whitaker before me, 5th March, 1862.-F. D. BELL.)

(3) 1st April, 1851. Robert Campbell and Andrew Blowers Smith to J. J. Falconer and the bank of Australasia (transfer of mortgages).-After reciting that Jeremiah Nagle, being entitled to certain lands at the Great Barrier, had mortgaged the same to William Abercrombie, John Mackay, and Charles Abercrombie, to secure £1,466, and also that William Webster and Peter Abercrombie, being also entitled to other tracts of land in New Zealand, had mortgaged them to William Abercrombie and John Mackey to secure £3,267; and reciting the mortgage of 24th August, 1843 [above recited in No. 1] from Abercrombie and Mackay to Campbell and Smith; and reciting the grant, 6th July, 1844, of 8,070 acres to Nagle, and the grant, 6th July, 1844, of 8,080 acres to Webster, and the grant, 6th July. 1844, of 8,119 acres to Abercrombie, at the Great Barrier; and reciting that, by three deeds, dated 15th, 6th, and 15th July, 1844, Nagle, Webster, and Abercrombie had conveyed the land in those grants to Edward Chalmers nominally; and reciting the mortgage, 1st January, 1845, Chalmers, Nagle, and Webster, also Peter Abercrombie and William Abercrombie, and John Mackay, to Campbell and Smith [above_recited in No. 2], whereby Chalmers, by the direction of the others, conveyed to Campbell and Smith, the three parcels, first, secondly, and thirdly next in the present transfer of mortgages described; and reciting the grant of 5.000 acres at Piako, and 125 acres at Coromandel to Peter Abercrombie; and reciting the mortgages of 8th October, 1845 [No. 1], and 13th February, 1846 [No. 2]: and reciting that there was still due from William Abercrombie and J. Mackay to Campbell and Smith £10,000 for cash advances, and from William Abercrombie, John Mackay, Charles Abercombie, Jeremiah Nagel, William Webster, and Peter Abercrombie, a further sum of £25,000 for cash advances, etc.; and reciting that Campbell and Smith, having become indebted to the corporation of the bank of Australasia in the sum of £35,000, had proposed to convey all the lands mentioned in the above deeds to the bank in liquidation of such debt, which proposal the bank had accepted, directing the conveyance to be made to Falconer: Witnesses that, in pursuance of such agreement, and for the consideration aforesaid, Campbell and Smith convey to Falconer and his heirs

1. The 8,070 acres at the Great Barrier granted to Nagle;

2. The 8,080 acres at the Great Barrier granted to Webster;

3. The 8,119 acres at the Great Barrier granted to W. Abercrombie;

4. The 5,000 acres of Piako granted to W. Abercrombie;

5. The 125 acres of Coromandel granted to P. Abercrombie;

6. The right and interest of William Abercrombie to the 150 acres at Kopu, the 15,000 acres, and the 25,000 acres; and

7. All other lands to which they (Campbell and Smith) are or may be entitled under the deed of 24th August, 1843,

with all claim at law or in equity, etc., to the use of Falconer, etc., subject to the equities of redemption (if any) then vested in the various mortgagors by virtue of the preceding mortgages: and further witnesses that, for the same considerations, Campbell and Smith assign to Falconer the personal estate of William Abercrombie and John Mackay; and also the principals and interest of the mortgage debts: And appoint Falconer attorney, to sue, etc. With mutual usual covenants. (Registered at Sydney, 17th June, 1858.)

4. 15th November, 1854. The Bank of Australasia to Frederick Whitaker and Theophilus Heale (conveyance).—Annexed to last preceding deed of 1st April, 1851. After reciting that a sum of money greatly exceeding the consideration in the present deed stated still remained due on the security of the annexed deed, but that the Bank of Australasia had applied, in part extinguishment of such debt,

a portion of the lands and chattels mortgaged, and that Whitaker and Hale had contracted for the purchase of their interest in the residue for £6,000: Witnesses that, in consideration of such £6,000, the Bank of Australasia and Falconer convey, release, and assure to Whitaker and Heale all the lands (except so far as applied or disposed of) which by the annexed deed of 1st April, 1851,were conveyed to Falconer, subject to the equities of redemption (if any) then subsisting; and transfer the mortgages and mortgage debts, etc. And appoint Whitaker and Heale attorneys to sue, etc. With mutual covenants. Receipts for £6,000 by the Bank of Australasia appended. (Registered at Sydney, 17th June, 1858.)

[NOTE.-By a conveyance annexed to the preceding, and of even date, Whitaker and Heale convey the three parcels at the Great Barrier to W. S. Grahame; in respect whereof Grahame applied (see papers in Claim 32, of Webster and Abercrombie) for a new grant in substitution for the old ones, and received (29th December, 1854) a grant for 24,269 acres.]

From the preceding documents it will be seen that the various grants which were issued in Claim 305K now stand thus:

Some time after the grants were called in-namely, on the 27th of September, 1859 I received notic from Mr. Robert Graham, on behalf of William Abercrombie, that the latter claimed (inter alia) the 5,000 acres comprised in Peter Abercrombie's grant. I thereupon fixed the 20th December, 1859, to hear the parties, but no proof of title was tendered on the part of Abercrombie. On the 31st January, 1860, I informed Mr. Graham that I would wait till the mail due at Auckland in February arrived, in order to give the opportunity of certain papers coming, which he expected to receive from the Abercrombies in support of the claim; but that, if they did not arrive then, I should proceed with the adjudication. Nothing whatever has since been adduced, nor, indeed, do I see how any can well be, to alter the position of the parties under the mortgages I have recited above. Neither is it material, because my recognition of Whitaker and Heale as the vestees of the legal estate does not effect any subsisting equities. The 24th section of "the land claims act, 1856," provides that every new grant shall be subject in equity to the same claims, rights, and interests as the cancelled grants in lieu whereof such new grants shall be issued. So Peter and William Abercrombie may still (if any equities subsist) come in and redeem; and, if the recital in the transfer of mortgages to the Bank of Australasia be true-namely, that the amount due in 1851 upon the securities was £35,000—I should think Whataker and Heale would be very glad to take the money.

Having thus shown the present ownership under the old grants, it appears to be necessary, before proceeding to the particular awards to be made to the respective claimants, to notice the position of the Government in the matter, and the way in which the public interest is in reality involved in the settlement of this claim. It is not within my province to express any opinion as to the original issue by Governor Fitzroy of grants to the extent of 12,674 acres in this claim, and of 24,269 acres in claim 32 of Webster and his partners, Abercrombie and Nagle, making 36,943 acres granted in the two cases. But it is certain that, as regards the Piako claim, notwithstanding the evidence before Commissioner Godfrey in 1842, the natives would never have agreed to give up possession to the extent which Webster claimed to have purchased. When Johnson tried to go on the land comprised in his grant he found "serious obstructions and difficulties;" and as to the residue, the papers recorded in the case show that quiet possession was, ten years ago, certainly not to be had. The causes of the native opposition appear clearly in the reports of (see ante, p. 29) the district land purchase commissioner.

A more careful examination of the area which the natives admitted was Webster's showed that, out of the 18,000 acres included in the survey,* there were about 7,500 acres so admitted to have been formerly sold, instead of 6,000, as estimated by Mr. Hay at first.

AUCKLAND, 26th September, 1861.

F. D. BELL, Land Claims Commissioner.

This concludes what I have to say with respect to Mr. Webster's claims and the treatment they received from the duly constituted courts in the colony to which they were submitted for examination. All the original documents in any way connected with the said claims, all original native deeds, and letters showing the nature of the transactions between Webster and the natives, the original evidence of all witnesses (native or European), all the Crown grants originally issued to Webster, all the conveyances of land by Webster to his purchasers, all the original rewards and reports made by the several commissioners from time to time in each claim are still extant in Wellington among the records of the land claims court, and the foregoing insertions in this document have been copied from the said records.

It will be now necessary to point out the inaccuracies in the report of the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate of the United States regarding Mr. Webster's claims:

1. Statement, page 37, pars. 2 and 5.-That Mr. Webster claimed 500,000 acres, for which he paid the natives a consideration of $70,000 (£19,834).

Answer. Total area claimed, as notified in the Gazette, 132,300 acres; consideration paid, in cash and merchandise, as proved before the court, the goods being estimated at three times their retail selling price in Sydney, £5,876.

2. Statement, page 39, par. 1.-That "he (Mr. Webster) has had no day in court, and his lands have been confiscated without a hearing and without notice." Answer. The sworn evidence of Mr. Webster in every one of his claims, as given before a commissioner, signed by Mr. Webster himself in each case, is extant in the records of the land claims court, and has been printed in the foregoing part of this document.

3. Statement, page 39, par. 7.-"This refusal to confirm 'grants made to' Mr. Webster was not attempted to be justified on the ground that 'land claims marked" 305H" and "305J" 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.""

Answer. The evidence previously printed herein, on pages 10 and 11, shows that, in respect of 305H, the claim was absolutely opposed by the native owners, and disallowed by the first commission; and that, in respect of 305J, the natives would admit that two small pieces only (supposed contents unknown) of the Mercury Island had been bought by Webster.

Mr. Webster, in a letter of 4th November, 1840, to Mr. J. H. Williams, United States consul at Sydney, states: "I have another island, called the Mercury Island, which contains about 16,000 acres." In the claim to the commissioners he states the area to be 6,000 acres, the actual area on survey being 4,090 acres.

4. Statement, page 39, last par." 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 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.'

"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 Australia, 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." Answer. Webster had grants made to himself of 5,000 acres, besides the grants Made by the Government when negotiating with the natives for the purchase of the Plakto block of land, with a view to a settlement of the disputes about the land claimed therein.

for 12,655 acres, which were made at his request and upon his sworn evidence, to parties who had purchased from him, over and above a grant to himself of 8,080 acres at the Great Barrier Island, and of 8,119 acres of the same island to Abercrombie, and 8,070 acres to Nagle, his partners. Webster did not, in any single case, act as the agent for others, as can be seen from the terms of the caveat lodged by Messrs. Chambers and Holden, printed on page 5, in relation to claims made by derivative purchases from Webster. The Great Barrier claim was made in the names of Abercrombie, Nagle, Webster, and Co., in partnership. A gross award of 24,269 acres was made in favour of the partners, and subdivided by partition as aforesaid between the individuals forming this partnership. Total awards to Webster himself, 13,080 acres. Gross awards to Webster

and his assigns in respect of all his claims, 41,924 acres.

5. Statement, page 40, par. 7-"He insists that his rights have been overslaughed because of his repeated refusals to renounce his allegiance to the United States and to become a British subject."

Answer. The correspondence previously printed on page 6 shows that the governor required Mr. Webster to declare whether he advanced his claims as a foreign subject or a British subject; and his reply and subsequent conduct proves that he elected to come before the commissioners as a British subject. Mr. Webster did not become naturalized in the colony. There was no naturalization ordinance passed in the colony before 1845.

6. Statement, page 40, par. 9.-"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."

Answer.-The Great Barrier Island contains by survey 71,800 acres. Webster and his partners claimed 20,000 acres thereof only. An award in their favour was made for 24,268 acres, as above stated. The remainder of the island continued in the possession of the natives. Both Webster's partners and co-owners in part of the island were British subjects, William Abercrombie being a member of a firm of English merchants at Sydney, and Jeremiah Nagle being master of the British ship Neptune, of Liverpool, trading between England and Sydney. How could Webster, under these circumstances, pretend to convey the whole island to the United States, and especially by a letter to the United States consul dated 4th November, 1840, the colony having been proclaimed on the previous 14th January?

7. Statement, page 42, par. 7.-"British subjects now hold lands under the same conveyances made to him, confirmed by the commission, as to such subjects, which have been treated as if they had no existence when invoked in support of Mr. Webster's rights."

Answer. The evidence in Webster's claims clearly shows that no person obtained any land in Webster's claims except through Webster, and after proof that Webster had made a bona fide purchase from the natives, and had sold the land to the person claiming it.

I have to remark that in the year 1874 the Secretary of State, in a despatch to Governor Sir James Fergusson, required a report on Mr. Webster's claims, in order to reply to a complaint made Mr. L. C. Duncan, on behalf of Mr. Webster, that he had been treated with injustice in their adjudication.

Mr. O'Rorke, the then commissioner, and at present Sir G. M. O'Rorke, speaker of the house of representatives, furnished to the governor, for transmission to the Secretary of State, a full report on the claims, together with an opinion from Mr. Whitaker as to the accuracy of such report (who had been personally acquainted with all the details of Mr. Webster's land transactions at the Piako) and a further report from Dr. Pollen, then colonial secretary, who had been personally acquainted with Mr. Webster in New Zealand. (See Appendix A.) In answer to the despatch transmitting these documents, the Secretary of State expresses his opinion that Mr. Webster had been treated throughout with exceptional liberality; and encloses a letter from Mr. L. C. Duncan withdrawing from the position he had assumed as Mr. Webster's advocate.

I have also to add that in the year 1878 I held the office of land claims commissioner, and in that capacity I had finally to determine upon the enlarged acreage to be granted to Sir Frederick Whitaker in respect of the allowance for survey and fees in connection with Webster's Piako Claim 305K; that all the documents relating to Webster's claims came under my personal review, and I became intimately acquinted with all the facts connected therewith.

From a perusal of the documents included in this memorandum, I can not but feel assured that the United States Senate will feel satisfied, equally with Lord Carnarvon, that Mr. Webster has been treated with very liberal justice, espe

S. Doc. 231, pt 3-7

Uor M

cially seeing that awards were made in his favour, or in favour of his acknowl edged assigns, of every single acre of land which the native owners admitted he had justly bought from them. More than this he could not have received, whether claiming as a British subject or as an American citizen.

WELLINGTON, 15th August, 1887.

ROBERT STOUT.

APPENDIX A.

FORMER CORRESPONDENCE AND REPORT ON MR. WEBSTER'S

CLAIMS.

The Secretary of State to the Governor of New Zeland.

DOWNING STREET, 1st June, 1874.

SIR: With reference to my predecessor's despatch No. 75, of the 30th October, 1873, I transmit to you copies of correspondence with Mr. L. C. Duncan in regard to Mr. W. Webster's claims to lands and other property in New Zealand. I shall be glad to receive a report on these claims without loss of time, in the event of your not having already replied to my predecessor's despatch.

I have, etc.,

Governor the Right Hon. Sir JAMES FERGUSSON, Bart., etc.

[Enclosure.]

Mr. Duncan to the Earl of Carnarvon.

CARNARVON.

47, FINSBURY CIRCUS, E. C., LONDON, 23rd May, 1874. MY LORD: I have the honour to ask your lordship's attention to the communication addressed by Messrs. Kimber and Ellis, in September of last year, to Her Majesty's principal secretary of state for the colonies, urging the claims of Mr. W. Webster, a citizen of the United States, in respect of certain lands in New Zealand. In a note from the colonial office acknowledging receipt of that communication it was stated that his lordship would "forward a copy of it to the governor of the colony, with a request that the subject may be reported upon." A letter of the 20th February from New Zealand brings Mr.Webster information that about a month previous thereto "the original documents in the Crown office had been referred to the governor, the home Government having written asking inquiries to be made," etc.

Being now charged by Mr. Webster with the conduct of his claims, I respectfully beg leave to direct your lordship's attention, in addition to the foregoing, to the communication of the then envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of the United States, addressed to the Earl of Aberdeen, at that time (December, 1843 (Her Majesty's principal secretary of state for foreign affairs. In that communication the principles are stated upon which Mr. Webster relies for the recognition of his rights by Her Majesty's Government, and for protection for those rights by his own. In the reply of Lord Aberdeen, dated 10th February, 1844, the statement occurs 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; 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." Here I ask leave to call your lordship's very special attention to the important circumstance that Mr. Webster "had acquired all his lands from the chiefs prior to the proclamation of the Queen's sovereignty, and that fact is undisputed." Notwithstanding this undisputed and indisputable fact, it was only after the lapse of many years that about 16,500 acres were awarded to Mr. Webster out of 350,000 aeres bought and paid for by him "prior to the proclamation of the Queen's sovereignty" over those islands.

I have now to ask your lordship's attention to the reply from the foreign office (dated 30th October, 1873) to the communication addressed by Messrs. Kimber and Ellis in September of that year to the Right Hon. the Earl of Kimberley,