CO885(1-2) — Page 638

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

C.O.

Reference :-

€885

2

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

|ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

4

But the

amount of contribution to be so made. contribution was meant to be a fixed one; and the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury can by no means admit, as you are aware from my despatch No. 164, of the 18th of September last, that it was ever intended by the Home Government to defray two-thirds of whatever amount of future expendi- ture might be incurred by the local Government for police and gaols. Such a course would have seri- ously interfered with one of the main inducements to a salutary economy on the spot; and, the amount of charge to which it would have rendered the Home Government liable must have been quite indefinite.

9. But independently of the foregoing arguments, it is to be remembered that when the contribution of £24,000 was agreed upon, it was intended that the colony should be charged for the full value of the labour of all convicts employed on colonial works, and also that the land fund should be given up to the Treasury in return for the large annual payment which was to be made from this country. Both these limitations of the grant have since been removed. By the labour of the convicts the colony is now obtaining, at a very small expense, public works of the greatest value for the improvement of its trade and the development of its resources, as for instance the wharf at Hobart Town; and the land fund which has been restored to the colony affords the means of carrying on such works to a large extent.

10. Mr. Leake states further, that as the public lands are held in trust for the benefit of the colony, the cession of their proceeds to local objects cannot justly be viewed as a boon. I cannot entirely agree in the view thus stated by Mr. Leake, since I con- ceive that it is as trustee for all her subjects both in this country and in the colony that Her Majesty holds these lands; and in the present instance it is

to be borne in mind that at a time when the finances of the colony were embarrassed, and when it was complained that the land fund had seriously fallen off, the Home Government consented to make a large payment of money to the colony annually, taking the diminished land fund as some set off against that contribution, and, therefore, to restore

*

*

5

It

that fund afterwards was a distinct concession. was giving up one of the conditions on which an annual payment had been granted, which payment. continues to be made without diminution.

11. Nor should I omit to point out that the

public lands which yield the territorial revenue would be valueless without an ample supply of labour, and that were it not that this supply in Van Diemen's Land is afforded by convicts, the land fund would there, as in all the neighbouring colonies, be principally absorbed in the necessary introduction of immigrants; so that the amount of this revenue available in Van Diemen's Land for local objects may be considered as a clear addition to the means of the colony, derived from the pre- sence of convicts.

12. I must also observe that another concession

has been made to the colony, in addition to the two above noticed, since the time when the pecuniary contribution towards the expense of police and gaols was adopted. Parliament has granted a sum of £30,000 towards the introduction of free immi- grants into those colonies which receive convicts a vote which I trust may be repeated this year, and which will in that case fall almost entirely to the share of Van Diemen's Land; and although the circumstances of the island are such that it would not gain permanently by the introduction of ordi- nary labourers, I trust that means may be found of spending any funds granted by Parliament in such a manner as will add to the number of settlers possessed of some capital.

13. I have thought it due to Mr. Leake thus to recapitulate some of the grounds on which I have been unable to acquiesce in its conclusions, although I have bestowed on his protest the attention to which I felt that it was justly entitled.

14. Finally, I have to observe that I have not overlooked the wish expressed by you to receive instructions on the questions adverted to

in your former despatches Nos. 121 and 129, of the 1st and 7th of October, 1847. Those questions related to the restoration of the land

[164]

H