(D.) Page 1.

The Maori King Movement, and the Queen's Supremacy.

Complicated with the Land-League already adverted to, and more dangerous, but not necessarily connected with it, for some members of the League repudiate it, is the King Movement, the chief seat of which is among the Waikato. A Waikato chief, Te Whero Whero, or Potatau, was the first "King," and his son, who has assumed the style and title of Potatau II., has succeeded him. "There is a feeling of nationality among the natives in reference to their lands," and these they see fast passing into the hands of strangers. (McLean, Parl. Papers, July, 1860, p. 304.) The feeling also is strong amongstthem,—and common to them and to the loyal natives—that while the law interposes between the settler and the native, there is no law as between native and native; their ancient customs are falling into dis-suetude, and no new code has taken their place. These two feelings combined would appear to constituate the strength of the movement. The extreme party are earnest for a really independent national status. A larger party ask for no more than effective magisterial authority and a just share in the government of their country. None have hitherto manifested a disposition to commence hostilities against the Government; on the contrary, so far from having seized the opportunity for establishing a Maori kingdom, Potatau and the Waikato chiefs offered to mediate between Kingi and the Government. The movement is variously regarded by different authorities in the island as more or less serious. It might, doubtless issue in such an assertion of independence as would amount to a clear breach of the treaty of Waitangi; for by that treaty the natives became British subjects, and, resigning on the one hand their right to enter into treaty compacts and make territorial cessions to foreign powers (perhaps the most valuable to Great Britain, of all the adjuncts of the sovereignty,) and limiting their privileges page 37 in dealing with British subjects; they, on the other, established an indivisible unity of empire under the British crown, any breach of which would now be revolutionary. But Kingi's opposition to the sale of Waitara has no direct and antecedent connection with this movement, of the nature of cause and effect. Nay, it dates back of a period coincident with the colonization of the country and long anterior to either the land-league or the King movement. "I myself," says Riwai Te Ahu, "formerly heard the private language of Reretawhangawhanga, William King's father, in the pa at Waikanae, in 1840, in reference to Waitara, not to sell it to the Pakehas. And he continued to express the same determination until his death in 1844. And he left a strict injunction to William King to carry out his wishes after his death." (Fox, App., p. 54).

The Waitara natives have always manifested an indisposition to sell their lands, and a respect for the rights of absentees. (Parl. Papers, Apr. 1846, p. 143.)

It may not be superfluous to remark here, that the question as to whether Kingi acted in co-operation with the Land League and Maori King movement or not, is not material, so long as his interference was confined, as in this case, to the exercise of a right claimed by him under the established usages of the country.

The discrimination of the Governor was, therefore, greatly at fault, and his proceedings only such as still further to complicate, rather than unravel the difficulties of his position, when he "selected this particular occasion"—a simple question of the rights of property—"for vindicating the supremacy of the Crown." (Fox, p. 44).