Major Bunbury to Lieutenant-Governor Hobson.—(Ib. page 109.)

"June 19.—We arrived off the island of Kapiti; several canoes were leaving the Island, and, on my preparing to go on shore, fortunately the first canoe we met had on board the chief Rauparaha I was so anxious to see. He returned on board with me in the ship's boat, his own canoe, one of the most splendid I have yet seen, following. He told me that the Rev. Mr. Williams had been there, and bad obtained his signature to the Treaty."

The "Manawatu-Rangitikei Block," the purchase of which we have been repeatedly told by Dr. Featherston is "un fait accompli" is an extensive country, containing some 250,000 acres of mostly fine land, lying between the Manawatu and Rangitikei rivers, in the Province of Wellington. The question to be decided is simply this—Has the block been fairly purchased, or has it not? If fairly purchased, well and good; if not, then the Treaty of Waitangi has been broken.

The plaintiffs in the matter are the Ngatiraukawa non-sellers, who hold possession of, and most of whom are living on, the block. The defendants are His Excellency Sir G. Grey, K.C.B.; the General Assembly, the Ministers, and the Land Purchase Commissioner. The New Zealand and the British public will, I trust, act as the jury.

The case for the defendants was closed when Dr. Featherston on the 14th April, 1866, announced, to the Natives his acceptance of the block;—when, in December, 1866, in spite of the many protests from the non-sellers, together with their repeated requests to the Governor, the Assembly, and the Ministers, that their title to the land might be investigated in a court of justice before completing the purchase, he paid down to the Natives (the money having been supplied to him by the General Government) £25,000 as a discharge in full of all demands on the Government on account of the block; £2,000 to be reserved by the Natives page 5 for the non-sellers, and the Government agreeing to set apart certain reserves, according to the usual custom in all large purchases;—and when he announced to his Council in his opening speech on the 26th April, 1867,—"It is satisfactory to me to be able to state that the deed of cession has been duly executed, nearly seventeen hundred claimants have signed it, and that the questions just adverted to have been finally and amicably settled."

Of Dr. Featherston, the Chief Land Commissioner, I may say that since the framing of the New Zealand Constitution Act he has acted in the capacity of Superintendent of the Province of Wellington; that in general politics he is a Provincialist, whilst in Provincial politics he is a Centralist; that he is a gentleman who wept over the Waitara, and who considered it bis "chief duty to make the Maori's dying couch as easy and as comfortable as possible;" who stated at Taranaki, when speaking of the Natives, as I was informed by one of the officers of Her Majesty's 43rd Regiment,—" I have no sympathy whatever with the wretches, and I do not care how soon they are all exterminated;" and who, shortly afterwards, at Takapu, represented himself to the six tribes as "their friend—one who had ever advocated what he believed to be their true interests—one in whose justice and integrity they had implicit faith."

Of the Sub-Commissioner, Mr. Walter Buller, I may observe that he is simply a model official; one who is at all times ready and willing to say and do all and everything that he is bid; one who has repeatedly stated that, having undertaken the Manawatu purchase, he was "prepared to go any lengths to ensure its completion."

Of Sir G. Grey, K.C.B., the Assembly, and the Ministers, I may observe that, whilst they may have proved themselves capable of framing laws whereby to bring about and to accomplish the good government of the settlers' cattle and sheep, they have proved themselves wholly incompetent to the task of governing human beings, when those human beings are Maoris. Of each and every of them I fear it must be recorded—"Tekel." Mr. Cox, when moving the address in reply to His Excellency's speech on the 10th of June, said—" He for one was very glad that Native affairs would very shortly disappear from the catalogue of questions of policy brought before the House." Strange, should Mr. Cox's words, though not so intended, prove to have been prophetic!

Of the Native sellers I may say that many of them frankly admit that they took the money offered them and signed the deed of cession, though they had no title to the land, because requested to do so by the Commissioner; that the principal sellers, whilst they shrank away from the law," insisted "upon the sale, avowing their determination to fight if the purchase were not at once carried out; whereas the non-sellers are a quiet and peaceable people, whose" grand desire is to see the Maori people rendered page 6 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 following appears in the memorandum by Ministers in reply to the Aborigines Protection Society, dated 5th May, 1864, and signed "William Fox:"—

"4. As regards the question of the confiscation of Maori lands, against which a protest is raised, Ministers beg to make the following observations:—

"In the first place, it is a custom which has been always recognized by the Maoris themselves. In their wars, a conquered tribe not only forfeited its lands, but the vanquished survivors were reduced to a tributary position, and large numbers to personal slavery. The Government of New Zealand have always recognized such a title as valid; and a very large proportion, if not an absolute majority, of the purchases of land from the Maoris have been made on the basis of a recognition of this right of conquest."

The following appears in the statement of the proceedings of the Compensation Court, at the sittings held at New Plymouth, "Present: Francis D. Fenton, Esq., Chief Judge John Rogan, Esq., Judge; Home Monro, Esq., Judge:—

"Judgment in case of the non-resident claimants at Okura:—

"We do not think that it can reasonably be maintained that the British Government came to this Colony to improve Maori titles, or to reinstate persons in possession of land from which they had been expelled before 1840, or which they had voluntarily abandoned previously to that time. Having found it absolutely necessary to fix some point of time at which the titles, so far as this Court is concerned, must be regarded as settled, we have decided that that point of time must be the establishment of the British Government in 1840; and all persons who are proved to have been the actual owners or possessors of land at that time must be regarded as the owners or possessors of that land now."

We may imagine Dr. Featherston exclaiming "Is that the law?" "Thyself shall see the Act." In Dr. Featherston's admirable speech, delivered in the House of Representatives, on the 7th of August, 1860, when speaking upon the subject of the Waitara purchase and the Waitara war, is the following:—

"Sir,—I apprehend that there are certain Native titles which are based upon well-known customs, and have certain incidents attached to them which admit of no question—of no possible dispute. First, however, let me remind the House that, by the Treaty of Waitangi, 'the Queen confirms and guarantees to the chiefs and tribes of New Zealand, and to the respective families and individuals thereof, the full, exclusive, and undisturbed possession of their lauds and estates, forests, fisheries, and other properties, which they may collectively or individually possess, so long as it is their desire to retain the same in their possession.' page 7 It follows that whatever rights, especially territorial, the Natives possessed at the time the Treaty was made, the Government is bound to respect and preserve inviolate. Now, there are two titles to land, which are so universally acknowledged that they admit of no dispute, viz., by inheritance and by conquest."

Six years after the delivery of the above excellent speech, Dr. Featherston purchases 250,000 acres of (according to the Wellington Independent) "the finest land in New Zealand," from the conquered. He then tells the conquerors that he is in a position "to make them an award in land to the extent of such claims as are admitted by the sellers." As Dr. Featherston was speaking impartially in August, 1860, but acting partially in 1866 and 1867, the public will agree with me that he must be held bound to the opinions he expressed in his excellent speech delivered in the House of Representatives on 7th August, 1860.

All, therefore, that is necessary to show that "the Government were bound to respect and preserve inviolate" the right of the Ngatiraukawa non-sellers to the "Manawatu and Rangitikei Block" is to prove that they held sole and undisputed possession of the block by right of conquest in 1840, at the time the Treaty of Waitangi was signed; and to show that the Treaty of Waitangi has been wholly disregarded and clearly broken by the Government in their dealings with the Natives for the purchase of the block, it is necessary to prove that the land has been purchased by the Government of, that the deed of cession has been signed by, and that the greater portion of the money has been paid to, men of other tribes, who had been conquered by the Ngatiraukawa and their allies so far back as 1830; who were living in subjection to their conquerors—many of them in actual slavery—in 1840, and who, at the time the Treaty of Waitangi was signed, dare not to have asserted their title to one foot of the block; also to men who laid no claim to the land; whereas the great majority of the real owners have not, up to the present time, signed the deed of cession, nor have they taken one sixpence of the purchase-money, though every effort has been tried to frighten them into submission. That Dr. Featherston, after the Government had 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 on the Maori race: after the Natives had been expelled from the Waikato and other parts of the Northern Island, and their lands confiscated to the Crown, and all for the purpose of asserting in this land the supremacy of law, with several thousand British troops at the time in New Zealand, shortly after his return from the far-famed expedition through the bush during the West Coast campaign, where, shoulder to shoulder with the Commander-in-Chief of Her Majesty's forces, he breathed forth unlimited threatenings and slaughter against all and everything that opposed itself—an expedition which struck so much terror into the bosom of the Maoris, causing them to be (as Parakaia hath it in his petition) page 8 "ngingio noa iho,"—" paralyzed with fear,"—at a meeting of the Natives at Takapu, on the 14th April, 1866, acting for and on behalf of Her Majesty, ridiculed alike the idea of settling the various claims to the block by arbitration, by a division of the land, or by trial in the Native Land's Court. That Dr. Featherston, on the 14th April, after ignoring the claims of men who asked that their titles might be investigated according to law, "knowing the responsibility which his decisive answer would entail upon him, had not the slightest hesitation in giving it," and "felt no difficulty in announcing his acceptance of the block," at the hands of men who one and all shrank away alike from "arbitration or investigation in the Land Court," the principal chief of whom, Mr. Governor Hunia, actually boasted that "they (the Ngatiapas) had now plenty of arms and ammunition, and could easily drive off their opponents, and that they would now prefer an appeal to arms to any other course, and almost intimated that they had, during the West Coast campaign, reserved their ammunition for that purpose."^* That Dr. Featherston, acting in his capacity of Land Purchase Commissioner, paid £25,000 to the Natives in full of all demands for the block (less a small sum set apart for the dissentients); that he has repeatedly told the Natives, through his agent, that "their land is all gone to the Queen," and has publicly announced to his Council the final completion of the purchase. That during the interval between the month of April, 1866, when Dr. Featherston publicly announced to the Natives his acceptance of the block, and the month of December, 1866, when the purchase money was paid, the Ngatiraukawa chiefs, who opposed the sale, paid repeated visits to Wellington, and prayed His Excellency the Governor, the Assembly, and the Ministers, to grant them a fair hearing of their claims in a court of justice, and that, beyond a few of their letters appearing in the Blue Book, their prayers were totally disregarded. On the other hand, a Bill was passed, authorizing the raising of a loan of £30,000 for the purchase of their lands.

I may further add, that it will be seen that the Ngatiraukawa chiefs spared the Ngatiapas when Te Rauparaha desired them to destroy them all; that they, in 1849, restored to Ngatiapa the whole of the country to the north of the Rangitikei River, and that the whole of the purchase money was paid by the Commissioner to the Ngatiapa, it being understood that the Ngatiapas were to abandon any claim they might have felt disposed to set up to the land south of the river, on the score of their having been driven off it; and that a similar arrangement was made with the Rangitane tribe when the land on the other side of the block was restored to them by the Ngatiraukawas in 1858, all the purchase money being paid to Hirawanu, chief of the Rangitaues. It will be seen that Dr. Featherston got the Manawatu exception clause inserted in the "Native Lands Act" in 1862, because Ihakara presented him with a carved club in 1864.

page 9

As it is both law and custom with the Anglo-Saxon to register all titles to land, I cannot do better than here produce the following documents, being the register of the Ngatiraukawa's title to the Rangitikei-Manawatu country. Parakaia thinks it quite as good a title as the Anglo-Saxons can show to many of their possessions; he instances "Poa Hakena" (Australia) and Van Diemen's Land:—

"This is a year of contention about land. 23rd October, 1866. I wish to explain what was the Maori custom of old.

"The Pakehas take the Maori's land by right of conquest, but trample down my right obtained through conquest, by which these tribes became possessed of this country. Attend, and I will relate the history of these tribes. Te Rauparaha was the first to conquer those people (the original owners). When Whanganui heard, they induced Kangihiwinui, chief of Muaupoko, to murder Raupabara (his people). They murdered at Ohau Borne of Ngatitoa, old and young. Ngatitoa then mustered to fight those tribes—Muaupoko and Eangitano—those tribes were vanquished.

"Whanganui then persisted; they all mustered and went to Kapitito fight the Ngatitoa. Ngatitoa conquered those tribes—"Waitotara, Whanganui, Ngatiapa, Rangitane, Muaupoko, Ngatikahununu—great numbers were killed, several hundreds perished in the sea, several hundreds were killed by the hand of man; up to the number of 1,000 (mano) perished in the year 1824. Ngatitoa then turned upon Ngatiapa, conquered them, and cut up Rangitikei and Manawatu, dividing to each man his portion. Those who escaped hid themselves in out-of-the-way places in the year 1824.

"When we of Ngatiraukawa at Maungatautari heard, we came here, Whatanui, Hukiki, and Nepia Taratoa, to see what the land was like, and visit Ngatitoa. We saw that it was good, and returned in 1827. When Ngatiraukawa heard it was a good land, that there were Pakehas, another party came down to see the land, and returned in the year 1829. When the second party returned, Rauparaha instructed them to tell Ngatiraukawa to come down and occupy Kangitikei and Manawatu. We left Maungatautari, Patetere, and Taupo, and came to Kapiti, to the place where there were Pakehas: that is why we migrated to this place, that we might obtain guns and powder. We left in the month of May; in July we arrived at Turakina; there we attacked and defeated the Ngatiapas. We came on to Kangitikei and Oroua; there we also defeated the Ngatiapas. We came on to Manawatu and defeated the Kangitane. We took possession then and there of the land in the year 1830. When we arrived at Otaki we divided the eel ponds; when we reached Waikanae the Ngatiawa were there—the Ngatitoa were at Kapiti; Ngatitoa all mustered at Waikanae to receive our party. Ngatitoa divided our party amongst them, each chief agreeing to act as host to a certain number. Rangihaeata received Aperahama Te Ruru and page 10 our party as his guests. In the month of August, 1830, each chief set apart a portion of land to their several guests. The whole tribe of Ngatitoa agreed to this; they set apart each man a portion for his friend. After that, the chiefs of our party assembled at Rangatira, on the Island of Kapiti. The chiefs Rauparaha and Rangihaeata said Rangitane and Muaupoko must be destroyed, on account of those tribes having murdere d Te Hira and Te Poa. Muaupoko murdered them. Paetahi, the father of Mete (chief of Whanganui), was the instigator, he having incited Eangihiwinui to murder Te Eauparaha (his people); this was the reason why we were told to destroy Eangitane and Muaupoko. Ngatitoa had given no cause for this; only one woman had been killed in a quarrel about a canoe.

"We went from Otaki to fight with those people. The pa Hotuiti was taken, in the Manawatu country. Rangitane fell. We divided their land amongst us, to each man a portion. Ngatiapa were not interfered with. "We then returned to Otaki. The men of those tribes whom we had enslaved were allowed to call in those who had escaped on former occasions, and we permitted them to dwell in our midst with their several masters. Each pointed out to his master, of Ngatiraukawa, their lands, which were taken possession of accordingly, and our people on their part gave of their goods to the survivors, guns, powder, axes, and hatchets.

"We then attacked "Whanganui, on account of a murder committed by Whanganui. Fifty chiefs and Ruamairo, of Ngatiraukawa, had been murdered. Whanganui were defeated in two battles—one pa was taken (Patikiwharanui). Ngatiapa were with us in that fight. Ngatiraukawa made peace with those tribes in 1831. Turoa put a stop to the fighting. Next came parties from Taranaki. Ngatiapa, Eangitane, and Muaupoko were living at that time in our midst, and joined with us in fighting against those tribes. Those tribes, Eangitane and Ngatiapa, though living in our midst, were living in subjection, without authority over the land. They cannot refute this. Ngatitoa then attacked and defeated Muaupoko, then dwelling in our midst. They took their pa (Papaitonga), and divided their land amongst themselves in the year 1831.

"Thus those tribes dwelt with us in the olden time. After that came the Gospel. Thus they were spared and became free. Fighting ceased in 1839. Mr. Hadfield was the minister at Otaki, Mr. Mason at Whanganui. In Governor Grey's time Ngatiapa commenced selling; they tried to sell this side, we held it the Government were aware of that in 1848.

"In Governor Browne's time those tribes again tried to sell. Ngatirauka was still held this side of the Rangitikei. Governor Grey is aware of that land having been held back at that time in 1858. The Ahuoturanga and the Awahou were fairly sold to Governor Browne. Now we have Dr. Featherston: still the same piece of land. I now, therefore, say let this land be page 11 settled by the law, that we may go into the question of old Maori custom and law. In these years that England has taken possession of New Zealand by right of conquest, let me also assert my right, obtained by conquest. We have shown our love for the Queen by having allowed the sale of Rangitikei, of Awahou, and of Ahuoturanga. We now cease this generous alienation of our lands to our Pakeha friends at this end, as there will not be any left for ourselves if we continue to alienate it all to the Queen.

"The Government say, 'Give.' Another Governor comes: 'Give, give, give up the land to the Queen.' Is giving all that I have to do? Have I not a right to withhold? Should I give it all up to others? May I not retain some for myself?