On the case being submitted to Sir Hugh Cairns, for his opinion as to
its legal aspects, he stated that the commissioners were invested with
authority to inquire into all differences existing between landlords and
their tenants, and to propose, as a remedy for the settlement of such
differences, any measure which they might think desirable,—that in
consequence of the unconstitutional course adopted by the colonial
office in reference to the commission, there was no legal validity in
any of the proceedings which had taken place. But he expressed, at the
same time, the opinion that the proprietors who proposed the commission
were not morally justified in repudiating the finding of the commission
merely because there were certain other proprietors who did not become
parties to the proceeding. Sir Hugh Cairns might have added, that the
home government were, in honor, bound to sustain the award of the
commissioners, and to give validity to the acts of the assembly.
Impressed with the conviction that the home government, notwithstanding
its treatment of the commissioners’ award, would be disposed to give
effect to principles of settlement akin to those recommended by the
commissioners, the island government resolved to send Messrs. Edward
Palmer and W. H. Pope as delegates to England to submit fresh
conditions, which might prove acceptable. In October, 1863, these
gentlemen had an interview with the colonial secretary (the Duke of
Newcastle), when the land question was discussed. The proposals of the
delegates were subsequently embodied in a communication addressed to the
colonial secretary, and dated the thirteenth of October. A copy of that
communication was sent from the colonial office to Sir Samuel Cunard,
with the view of having its contents submitted to the proprietors by
that gentleman. On the fourteenth of November, the baronet sent to the
Duke of Newcastle a reply, in which he presented, at considerable
length, his own views of the points at issue. He contended at the outset
that the granting of the land originally in large blocks was “an act of
necessity,—that the grantees had all lost very heavily by accepting the
grants, and that no individual at present on the island had been injured
by that proceeding, but, on the contrary, the grants had been a fruitful
source of profit to the present generation.” This novel and intensely
absurd proposition Sir Samuel proceeded to establish by reference to the
taxation to which the proprietors were subjected, and the various
measures which had been passed by the local legislature, and confirmed
by the home government. Early in December following, Sir Samuel
addressed another letter to the Duke of Newcastle, enclosing a bill
which, he said, would be acceptable to the proprietors if adopted in its
integrity. To the baronet’s letters and bill, Mr. Pope replied, in an
able and exhaustive communication, dated the eighteenth of December,
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