Par. 73 To 83.

Here, on the subject of the "Investigation," the same course is taken by Mr. Richmond as before, page 43 with reference to the "Points in dispute." Scraps and fragments of doubtful assertions and unsifted evidence are produced by Mr. Richmond, and we are asked to accept them as a substitute for that proper inquiry which was demanded by every consideration of justice and expediency. Unproved allegations and uncertain inferences cannot be allowed to take its place. The defect of inquiry can only be supplied by a proper inquiry hereafter. The web, which Mr. Richmond has woven, is too weak to bear the weight of a civil war.

One passage only I think it necessary to notice: It is as follows (Par. 82); "Where unrepresented claimants are known, or believed, to exist, the Government makes inquiry on the spot; as was done in the present case at Queen Charlotte's Sound, and at Wellington. But where (as in the case of the Waikanae Natives) there is no reason to believe in the existence of valid claims, no local investigation is instituted. The Waikanae claimants (for whom the Rev. Riwai te Ahu acts as Secretary) ought to have come forward. They admit that they were aware of the negotiation at the time when the first instalment was paid in November, 1859."

On the contrary, there was very good reason to believe in the existence of valid claims at Waikanae. It was notorious that people closely connected with the Waitara were still at Waikanae. At a distance of 200 miles, they received no notice at all from the page 44 Commissioner of his proceedings. They hear of them for the first time, when the inquiry was concluded and the first instalment paid. This mode of dealing with absent owners is now justified; a Native Minister regards it as sufficient. If this be sufficient, what can be insufficient? Do we shew our superiority and our civilization by this contemptuous disregard of common justice?