To this minute, which was dated the twenty-second of July, 1862, the
Duke of Newcastle replied in a despatch of the ninth of August,
following. He expressed regret that he could not concur in the views of
the government. The main questions which the commissioners were
appointed to decide were: first, at what rate tenants ought to be
allowed to acquire freehold interests in their property; and, next, what
amount of arrears of rent should be remitted by the landlords. On the
first and most important of these questions, the commissioners professed
themselves unable to come to any conclusion, and, instead of deciding
it, they recommended, virtually, that it should be decided by other
arbitrators, to be hereafter nominated. This, however, he said, was not
what they were charged to do: they were authorized by the proprietors to
make an award themselves, but they were not authorized to transfer the
duty of making that award to others. The trust confided to them was a
personal one. The proprietors relied on the skill, knowledge, and
fairness of the three gentlemen appointed in 1860; and they could not,
therefore, be called upon, in deference to these gentlemen’s opinion, to
confide their interests even to arbitrators specially designated in the
award, much less to persons whose very mode of appointment was
undetermined by it. This objection might be waived by the proprietors,
but it was not waived; and being insisted on, the colonial secretary
said he was obliged to admit that it was conclusive, and he was bound
further to say that it was, in his opinion, an objection founded, not on
any technical rule of law, but on a sound and indisputable principle of
justice,—the principle, namely, that a person who has voluntarily
submitted his case to the decision of one man, cannot, therefore, be
compelled, without his consent, to transfer it to the decision of
another.
For these reasons, the colonial minister did not advise Her Majesty to
sanction the two acts which had been forwarded, and which were, of
course, intended to render the award obligatory on all who had consented
to the reference. The report of the commissioners was therefore regarded
by the home government simply as an expression of opinion which was not
binding, and which ought not to be allowed to stand in the way of any
other proposal which promised an amicable settlement of the question.
CHAPTER IX.
Bill to make the Legislative Council elective—Change of
Government—Address to the Queen, craving to give effect to the
Commissioners’ Award—A Review of recent Proceedings in regard to
the Land Question—The Assembly willing to meet the views of
Proprietors in regard to the appointment of Commissioners—The
Assembly and the Commissioners right, and the Colonial Secretary
wrong—The Reason-why given—The rejection of the Award
unreasonable—Delegates sent to England on the Land Question—The
Result.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account