desire to underrate these difficulties. But it is impossible now to withdraw from the course which has been commenced. The intention has been wisely disclaimed of making any revolution in the disposition of property. It has been decided to determine what are the existing rights and to uphold them. Great progress has been made in the performance. But it would be vain to suppose that all which is necessary has been already done. The original record formed at the time of Settlement was often erroneous and imperfect; indeed it could not be otherwise. The system was new, the mass of the people were unable to comprehend the object and nature of the proceedings, and were moreover suspicious of any measures connected with the assessment of their lands. Under these circumstances it is surprising that so much was done, and so well done, at the time of Settlement. There is far more reason to take courage from the great progress already made, than to despair at the magnitude of what still remains to be done.'
Now, with some condensation, this is Thomason's account of his policy in his own words; and the very spirit of the man, the working of his mind, his style and method, are all apparent. Then there is found an important paragraph, by which he impresses his precepts on those concerned: —
'Let us suppose an intelligent officer appointed to the charge of a district where he is likely to remain some years. He is acquainted with the system of registration, and convinced of the importance and practicability of maintaining it. On coming, however, to refer to his Settlement records in cases that casually occur, he finds them imperfect or erroneous. He concludes that registers resting on such a basis must be defective, and he determines to apply himself in earnest to
