The General Assembly closed its Session on the 10th October. In the meantime an amended Native Lands Act was passed. I quote from the Wellington Independent.—

"The Manawatu Block.—The Whanganui Times, in announcing that a sittings of the Native Lands Court will shortly be held at Rangitikei, reprints clauses 38 and 39 of the Native Lands Act, passed in the Session just closed, by which the Governor is empowered to refer claims of non-sellers to the Native Lands Court, but claims must be established individually, and not by hapu, the sellers being, of course, excluded from all interference in the matter. The clauses were introduced into the Act at the suggestion of Dr. Featherston, and run thus:—(38) The Governor may at his discretion refer to the said Court the claim of any such person in land within the boundaries described in the second schedule hereto, being the boundaries described in a certain deed of sale to the Crown bearing date the thirteenth day of December, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-six, and expressed to be a conveyance by Natives entitled to land within the district excepted from the operation of the said Act by section eighty-two thereof. Provided that no claim by and no question relating to the title or interest of any Native who shall have signed the said deed of sale shall be so referred, and the Native Lands Court shall in the manner prescribed by the said Act investigate and adjudicate upon such claim and the interest in and title to any land so claimed. (39) From and after such date as may be appointed by the Governor in Council the eighty-second section of the said Act shall be repealed except so far as relates to the land included in the said deed of sale the boundaries of which land are set forth in the second schedule hereto. Provided that every holder of a land order originally selected within the block of sections laid out by the New Zealand Company at Manawatu shall be entitled to retain the particular section selected whenever the Native title may be hereafter extinguished and every certificate issued by the Native Lands Court in respect of the land comprised in the said block or any part thereof shall be and be on the face thereof described to be subject to such of the rights hereby reserved to claimants to the land comprised within such certificate."

I again quote from the Wellington Independent.—

"Among the papers laid before the Assembly, by command of page 61 His Excellency, we find a very interesting memorandum by the Hon. J. C. Richmond on the Rangitikei-Manawatu land dispute, attached to the petition of Parakaia and others which was recently forwarded to the Queen. The gist of the memorandum is contained in the following paragraph:—' It must be understood that the exact definition of a Maori land claim is rarely, perhaps never, possible. It would be impracticable to make any award to the non-contents in this case which would not be challenged by the sellers, who, though they have parted with their own interest in the land, might view its occupation by the other natives with great bitterness. The case is one, in short, of compromising an insoluble quarrel between half-civilized men, whose titles all rest on violence of a comparatively recent date, and who are only half weaned from regarding violence, even now, as the ultimate appeal. One side alleges conquest as its ground, the other the power to reconquer. Both appeal to Christianity, one to clench the status quo at the time of its introduction, the other to claim the restoration of territory then newly taken from them.'^* We always peruse with interest anything coming from Mr. Richmond's pen, and he is certainly entitled to speak with authority on this Manawatu question, having held the post of Native Minister during the progress of the long and tedious negotiations for its final settlement. Mr. Richmond considers the Manawatu purchase the settlement of the 'insoluble quarrel' between the tribes, but adds:—'A share of the purchase money is reserved for the non-contents, and large allotments of land will in any case be set aside for them. It has, however, been thought advisable to allow considerable delay in winding up the transaction, that as many as possible of the non-contents may come in.^† It is doubtful whether the quarrel might not be renewed, if an extensive part of the block proportioned to their numbers were at present laid off for them.' He also informs the Home Government that the petitioners have been repeatedly assured of full justice, and that no surveys have as yet been made in the purchased block, except to define reserves for the sellers.

"There is much truth in Mr. Richmond's remarks, and we consider that the Government, in the interests of peace, would have been perfectly justified in hanging the question up till all danger of the kind indicated had passed away. It seems to us, however, that the present position of the purchase alters the whole case, and the settlement of dissentient's claims has become now a very simple matter. The tribal dispute has been got rid of by purchase. Of the six tribes originally claiming to be interested in the block, five have unanimously agreed to the sale and taken their share of the purchase money—in other words, they have been bought out of the concern, and have nothing more to do with it. Their reserves have been defined,^‡ and their claims are finally silenced. Of the other tribe (Ngatiraukawa) the great majority, including nearly all the principal resident claimants, have agreed

^* Trash.—T.C.W.

^† When well wearied.—T.C.W.

^‡ Query.—T.C.W.

page 62 to the sale, some four hundred of them having signed the deed and taken their share of the purchase money. In all, about 1700 Natives have signed the deed of sale. The small party of non-contents who allege claims within the block and refuse to part with them, have taken up this position—they will not themselves define their claims, nor will they accept the Commissioner's definition of them, or agree to his award. The fact is that so long as a man like Parakaia, whose individual claims are very insignificant, can assert a general claim to the whole block, and obstruct the purchase, he is a great man among his fellows. The moment he is reduced to proving his actual claims and confining himself to them, he will, of course, fall back to his proper rank; and Parakaia is too shrewd a man not to know this himself. What we therefore require is, some means of compelling these outstanding claimants to come in and prove, before an impartial tribunal, what portions of the block they are fairly entitled to. Arbitration was proposed, and was agreed to by a section of the claimants, but this proposal fell through, owing to the difficulty of finding competent arbitrators. We have now, however, the remedy in the Native Lands Act of last session. By a clause in that Act—inserted, we understand, at Dr. Featherston's suggestion—the Government is empowered to fix a special sitting of the Native Lands Court at Rangitikei, to hear and adjudicate on all these claims. The Government, will, accordingly, refer to this Court all claims that have been sent in by the protesting party, and will accept its decision as final. When this has been done his Excellency will, we understand, be advised to proclaim the Native title extinguished over the rest of the block, and the vexed question of the Manawatu will then be a thing of the past."

I quote from the New Zealand Parliamentary Debates, second session of the fourth Parliament:—

"Wednesday, September 18th. Native Lands Courts at Turauganui. Mr. Carleton, in moving that the correspondence between the Government and the Judges of the Native Lands Court on the sitting of the Court at Turanganui, laid on the table of this House, be considered, presumed the whole case was shown in the correspondence which he held in his hand. . . . He could hardly conceive anything more irritating to the Natives than the conduct of the Government throughout the whole of the matter. It was calculated to destroy all their confidence in British institutions. He did not say that it destroyed all confidence in the Government, because they had not entertained any confidence in the Government for several years past. The Natives had confidence in the Queen, where they believe they could obtain the ear of the Queen, or where they could obtain access to the Crown, They did not believe in Governors, they did not believe in Governments, for the proceedings of Governments had been such as to destroy what little of confidence might at any time have been supposed to exist in the Native mind. In regard to Native matters, he (Mr. Carleton) had no confidence in Governments. page 63 He did not believe they would purposely do injustice, but they did not understand the question. The sooner the whole of that power of meddling and muddling was taken out of their hands, the better it would be for the peace of the country and the finances of the Colony. At last the Court proceeded to sit at Turanganui. What was the result? Another adjournment was applied for. Extreme dissatisfaction was manifested amongst those who had been brought away from their homes again and again, at their own cost, and the same amount of dissatisfaction was felt by those who had to receive them according to the law of Maori hospitality, a law which was never violated. They thought they were being made fools of. Nothing remained but for the Judge, although he himself could not help being exceedingly dissatisfied, to attempt to bring back the Natives to confidence in British institutions. Judge Monro could have adopted no better, no more judicious, course than he did on that occasion to preserve the peace of the country, and restore confidence in British institutions. He (Mr. Carleton) would reiterate the words * British institutions,' for he could not expect the Natives to have confidence in anything else, although he did see some rising gleam of confidence in that house—in what they call the 'white runanga.' Judge Monro proved to them that there was an institution in the country on which they could depend; an institution in which there was no vacillation, no question of mere expediency involved; an institution which was regulated by considerations of law and equity alone; an institution which was powerful in itself, and beyond the influence of Government. That was the first thing the Judge endeavoured to show to the Natives. He showed them the perfect independence of the Court of that Government which they justly distrusted. So long as the Government could override that Court, the Natives would not believe in that Court. That Court was the true guarantee for peace at the present moment; and in the same proportion as the Court was tampered with or interfered with, in the same proportion were the chances of another outbreak. He (Mr. Carleton) did not think the Judge could have given a more judicious proof of the independence of the Court—that it was staunch to the Natives; an institution in which they could place their entire confidence—than he did by the course he had adopted. Did anybody deny that? The Government denied it practically, but they should recollect that that House had decreed the independence of the Court, and caused it to be appointed, not durante bene placito, but quamdiu se bene gesserint—not during pleasure, but during good behaviour. Was the House of opinion, when doing that, that they were decreeing a sham, or that their action would ever become a sham? The intention of the House ought to be carried out. He (Mr. Carleton) did not doubt the House would affirm, whenever called upon to do so, that the Judges of the Court were justified in asserting that independence which was made a special condition of their appointment. . . It mattered very little page 64 to the Judge what confidence the Government might have in him, so long as he retained the confidence of that House; but in the last paragraph the Government attempted to make him believe that at one time they were inferior to the Court, and at another time so superior as to be able to give directions. They supposed themselves superior to everything at once; they brought to his mind a phrase of Cicero's:—' Tres personas unus sustineo; meam, adversarii, judicis. 'I am playing three parts—I am plaintiff, defendant and judge.' That appeared to him to be the position which the Government were attempting to arrogate to themselves. He had avoided details as much as possible. He had risen for the maintenance of a principle, and it was seldom he did rise except for such a purpose. He cared very little for details, but he had a very clear appreciation of principles, especially those in which they had been brought up in the mother country; and whenever he saw a principle infringed, whether by a friendly Government, or one to whom he was in opposition, most assuredly would he rise for the maintenance of that principle. The special principle which he had then risen to maintain was that no interference could be tolerated as to the Courts of law. It was not only on that occasion, not only in reference to the Native Lands Court, that interference bad taken place, but it had also taken place with regard to the supreme Court in a manner that was highly objectionable. He did not specially refer to the present Administration, for he looked upon the General Government as one and continuous. He had seen correspondence with the Judges land on the table of which he was ashamed; and on all occasions whatever upon which he perceived the slightest inclination to any interference with the judicial Courts, so long should be rise to protest against it in the strongest terms. He could not tolerate an attempt to browbeat a Court of law. He hoped that the House would think fit to maintain the perfect independence of a Court which had been constituted by itself." ...

"Mr. Stafford said . . . He entirely agreed in the terms his hon. colleague had made use of in reference to the conduct of Mr. Monro. He could only say it was very fortunate for that gentleman that he had not had to deal with him instead of his hon. colleague. He (Mr. Stafford) should not have let him off so easily, but would have gone a great deal further, and have stopped his salary, and then he would have allowed him to rush to that House, as he appeared to have done.

"Mr. Carleton: The hon. Member is entirely under a misapprehension. I have had no communication, directly or indirectly, with Mr. Monro.

"Mr. Stafford believed, if there was one thing more calculated than another to provoke a breach of the peace, it was the action of Mr. Monro on that occasion. They were told that the Judges of the Native Lands Court were to be higher than the Legislature and the Government of the country. They were told at the same time that no Governor had the confidence of the natives, and that page 65 they only believed in the Queen. When had the Natives ever communicated with or approached the Queen, except through the Governor? And vet the House was told by its oldest member, by one who specially attributed to himself a knowledge of Native character, that the Natives did not believe in the General Government or the Governor, but only in the Queen, who practically never interfered with them, and never would. It would be teaching them to lean upon the very rottenest reed if they were advised not to listen to either the Governor or the Government. This was what the Natives had been advised in 1860, and with the most dire effect, as they were deluded enough to act upon it. The man who gave such advice, either through want of sagacity or otherwise, was no true friend to the race. He would bring the question to an issue in consequence of the language used by the hon. gentleman; and he would, let the House determine, so that there could be no mistake about the matter. He would tell the hon. gentleman that, so long as he had the honor to be one of the advisers of the Crown, he would take such action as circumstances might require, even if it should be to suspend the operation of the Judges of the Native Lands Court, whenever such a course was for the public interests—aye, even if the Judges were swept away altogether. He and his colleagues would take that responsibility upon themselves, when they thought public interests demanded it. If, therefore, the hon. member thought that was an improper position, or one which would not be upheld by the Legislature, he had now a fair opportunity of taking issue upon the subject. He would leave to his hon. colleague, who was familiar with the details, to advert more particularly to some observations of the hon. member for the Bay of Islands, but he wished it to be distinctly understood that he should never scruple to suspend the action of a Court of so tentative a character, and one which was altogether an experiment, as that which it was proposed to hold under the East Coast Titles Act. It had been a question of policy to create these Courts, and it was every day becoming a question whether it was advisable that they should be continued. He, for one, should never hesitate, so long as he had the responsibility of administering public affairs, to arrest any action, whatever, which he thought to be injurious to public interests, even though it might be taken under the name of a Court." They will be brave Judges who, after reading the above speech which fell from the sapient lips of that great man the Prime Minister—not of Europe, not of Britain, but of New Zealand—who, thinking that injustice may have been done to the Natives, and being desirous of amending that injustice, would undertake to adjudicate upon the claims of Ngatiraukawa non-sellers. I trust the Judges will be advised, and before they enter upon their very delicate mission to the Manawatu, will do themselves the honor of waiting upon the Hon. E. W. Stafford, and of ascertaining from him how the "advisers of the Crown" would wish them to give their decisions, otherwise they will be "swept away." Their page 66 position and their income will not be worth one solitary week's purchase; far better for them that they should be found toying with millstones among the waters of the Manawatu, than that they should offend against the peculiar views respecting the public interests entertained by New Zealand's Prime Minister!

The Hon. J. C. Richmond, who has "held the post of Native Minister during the progress of the long and tedious negociations for the final settlement of the Manawatu question," must be either woefully ignorant of the facts of the case, or he must have been filfully misstating the ease to Her Majesty's Government, when he says—" It is doubtful whether the quarrel might not be renewed if an extensive part of the block proportioned to their numbers were laid off for them," Such a statement, to say the least, comes with a very bad grace from the Native Minister of a Government that has but lately expended three millions of colonial treasure with a vast amount of "British blood and treasure," inflicting at the same time a vast amount of misery upon the Maori race, for the avowed purpose of asserting in this land the supremacy of law! Such a statement is worse, it is entirely untrue. The Ngatiraukawa, and they alone have held possession of the block for now nearly forty years. All that Ngatiapa wanted with the block was to sell it to a land-sharking Government. The New Zealand Magistrates, and among them there are many very worthy men, have repeatedly stated that were there no receivers of stolen property there would be fewer thieves. The Hon. W. C. Richmond, in 1860, writing to Her Majesty's Government in defence of his Waitara purchase and Waitara war, stated,—" The grand desire of the British colonists, in respect of the Natives, is to see the Maori people rendered amenable, in their dealings with the settlers, to British law, and that all the inhabitants of New Zealand should be subjected in their mutual dealings to the control of one common law." The Hon. J. C. Richmond, writing, in 1867, in defence of the Manawatu purchase, in a case where 250,000 acres have been purchased from five tribes having no title to the land, speaking of the sixth tribe, the real owners, says:—"It is doubtful whether the quarrel might not be renewed if an extensive part of the block proportioned to their numbers were at present laid off for them." In either case a kind and paternal Government must have the land. Had the British Government condescended, in 1860, to investigate the Waitara purchase, they might have preserved the unfortunate Maori race from much subsequent rebellion, crime, and misery; they might have saved a vast expenditure of "British blood and treasure;" they might have saved this unfortunate Colony from the burdens which are now so great a hindrance to its advancement and prosperity. If the British Government will now cause the Manawatu purchase to be thoroughly investigated, they will soon see how much reliance is to be placed upon statements emanating from New Zealand statesmen respecting matters wherein the Maories are concerned.

The Hon. J. C. Bichmond tells Her Majesty's Government, speaking of the unfortunate non-sellers, "It is doubtful whether the quarrel might not be renewed if an extensive part of the block proportioned to their numbers were at present laid off for them."

The Hon. E. W. Stafford tells the Judges of the Native Lands Court if they act in opposition to the public interests he will "sweep them all away." It is easy to foretel the result. Unless Her Majesty's Government interfere there has been attempted, and ere long there will have been accomplished in the Manawatu acts of bare-faced impudent injustice and of cruel oppression.

The General Assembly have now enacted that "The Governor may at his discretion refer to the said Court (the Native Lands Court) the claim of any person affecting the title to, or interest of any such person in land within (the Manawatu block)." What about the "six tribes?"Who are to decide what title five of the six tribes had to the land, and how far the General Government were justified in using those five tribes, numbers of them armed at the expense of the colonists, as a lever whereby to "crush the opposition "of the real owners "to the sale?" What about the "seventeen hundred signatures?" Who are to decide how many of the seventeen hundred men represented by those signatures had no title whatever to the block? What is to be done in the case of men who may have signed the deed of sale upon certain conditions, which conditions have not since been fulfilled by the Government? What again in the case of men who signed the deed when in a state of intoxication? What in the case of men who signed the deed, being weary of the whole question, living, as they were, under a Government which never interfered in Maori quarrels saving only when something was to be gained? Who are to decide whether the sale and the purchase first and last have or have not been a most impudent swindle? Who are to decide whether or not the deed of cession ought to be burned, and the Land Purchase Commissioners, with others, sent away to the Chatham Islands?^*

Her Majesty the Queen of Great Britain "confirms and guarantees to the chiefs and tribes of New Zealand, and to the respective families thereof, the full, exclusive, and undisturbed possession of their lands and estates, forests, fisheries, and other properties which they may collectively or individually possess, as long as it is their wish and desire to retain the same in their possession." The General Assembly of New Zealand purchased 250,000 acres of fine land, the rents of which had been kindly and judiciously impounded—from five tribes having no title to the land—then enacts that "any person" of the sixth tribe may, "at the Governor's discretion," have his claim heard in the Native Lands Court before Judges whom the Prime Minister is prepared to "sweep away "if they act in any way in opposition to the "public interests." The

^* The largest of the Chatham Islands is used as a penal settlement for the Maoris.

page 68 Assembly, with an impudence that ia alike remarkable and inimitable, have, by the 39th clause of the Native Lands Act, fixed certain land orders issued by the New Zealand Company as so many mortgages upon land which is purely Maori property—land to which the Government have no shadow of a title. In fact the whole of the legislation, first and last, with respect to the Manawatu country, would appear to be so many little attempts at amendments upon the Treaty of Waitangi. Question.—Which should win—Great Britain's Treaty, or New Zealand's Bills?

Some few years ago the writer, himself a tall and stout man, was riding upon a tail and stout horse, some eleven miles from the city of Auckland, where he met with a very little man on foot, with whom he had some very high words. The discussion not proving satisfactory, the writer told the little man to "go to Jericho," and endeavoured to show him how his horse could trot. The little man, nothing daunted, drew himself up to his full height, which was not much poor little fellow, he then shouted after the writer with loud voice, and in tone alike indignant and defiant—" I a'int afraid of you, big as you are!"

When one reflects (the Maoris say "it is well sometimes to reflect") that New Zealand is a country each and every of whose cities might be blown down about the ears of the owners and the proprietors thereof by one solitary British frigate, when one reads the speeches of hon. members wherein it is calmly proposed that the House should go in for a declaration of its independence, the members it is to be imagined each and every of them standing upon their heads; when one reads the speeches of the honorable the Ministers, with the various, ominous, and formidable memoranda transmitted across the seas, from time to time, from the Ministers of New Zealand to the Ministers of Britain, one feels disposed to pat them each and severally upon the back, and with hearty and heartfelt admiration to exclaim, "Well done, little one!"

Great Britain should not forget that when Christian missionaries first landed in New Zealand, bearing in obedience to the commands of their Maker the blessings of salvation to the heathen, the Maoris were a race of wild and savage cannibals. Great Britain should not forget that when in 1840 she obtained Peaceable possession of the Islands of New Zealand by treaty through the instrumentality of Christian missionaries, the Maoris were at least professedly a Christian people—cannibalism had entirely ceased—war and bloodshed had almost ceased—the Sabbath was respected—in every pa and in every village throughout the land was heard the tinkle of the bell, sometimes of its substitute in the shape of a suspended musket-barrel, summoning the Maoris to morning and to evening prayer. Their law then, poor brave fellows, at the time when the Anglo-Saxons were weak and unarmed in this land was love (aroha) to the Pakeha. Wherefore this estrangement? How this sad change? Why has it become necessary that after twenty years of almost peaceful occupation page 69 fifteen thousand Anglo-Saxons should have been engaged, armed with fifteen thousand British bayonets, acting in the service and in the name of the Queen of Britain in decimating the tribes of the Maori, desolating their homes, confiscating their lands to the Crown, inflicting a vast amount of misery upon the Maori race, compelling them "naked and famine-stricken, to submit to the force of circumstances," trampling under foot the work of British Societies in this country, driving the Maoris to Hau-hauism, to debauchery, and to crime.

Britain should not forget, that though she is great, she is great only by comparison. This world is a great world, revolving through space, but far less than many other worlds, inhabited, doubtless, by peoples far more mighty, far more wealthy than the British. Britain should not forget, that though she herself is great, the God of the Christian churches is greater than she.

In conclusion, let me ask every candid minded man to urge upon the British Government that they should "send persons to investigate carefully this wrong" in order and to the good end that they may "trot out" the real delinquents and at the same time clear the Christian churches of Britain, and their agents who for half a century have laboured in this land, many of whom have already departed this life, others again are now standing upon the brink of the grave, with the Bishop of New Zealand, his colleagues and their ministry from the charge of having "been more than any man supposes the cause of that long and protracted war the burdens of which now hang about our necks to the hindrance of public and private prosperity."