Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

The Pamphlet Collection of Sir Robert Stout: Volume 10

Page 25

Page 25.

The first sentence of this Note misstates my proposition under the form of admitting it. The proposition in the Note is, that the Native cultivators and occupiers of the block could make a title without the consent of the whole tribe. Advantage is taken of the ambiguity of the word "tribe," here, as commonly used to indicate that Community or Society of which the cultivators and occupiers were members. My real meaning is put out of doubt by the next sentence of the text, in which the Government view is expressed in other words, viz.:—"That if Teira's right existed at all, it was of necessity an absolute right," and that it was the purpose "of the Government to disregard all claims but those of the individual holders."

In this Note a passage is set forth which purports to be a part of Governor Fitzroy's speech of 3rd Aug. 1844. It is produced in order to explain away the natural meaning of the words used by himself in his official statement to the Home Government. In fact, the passage set forth is no part of that speech. It is taken from a sort of Leading Article page 11 in the Maori Gazette, published at Auckland 2nd September, 1844. In the same number o the Gazette (pp. 46-47) the speech itself is set forth. Then follows a brief notice of other speakers; then another address without a name, to the absentee owners, urging them to go to the nearest teacher or protector, to register their names and claims to land, so that, if they should not be disposed to sell and their masters should be willing to manumit hem, they might return to their own places.

In page 48 commences the before-mentioned Leading Article, reviewing and commending the Governor's proceedings at Taranaki, contrasting the English and French modes of Colonization and ending by enlarging on divers passages of Scripture. From this Article the words cited in the Note are translated. They appear to apply to the Town Block which Governor Fitzroy insisted on retailing, whilst he was content to recall the settlers from other parts of the District. When a block is to be ceded, of course the marking out of individual holdings becomes necessary in order that the payment nay be apportioned. But before it comes to this stage of the business, the Community must have already assented to the Cession. The contrast which runs throughout the words of Governor Fitzroy and the comments thereon, is not a contrast between the individual right and that of the Community, but a contrast between the rights of the owners on the spot and those of the absentees.

page 12

The source of the whole difficulty which Governor Fitzroy found at Taranaki was this: the persons who were on the spot at the time of the arrival of the New Zealand Company's agent, desiring to secure the presence and protection of the Pakeha, had sold a tract of land without the assent of the absentee owners. This fact furnishes the key to all that Governor Fitzroy said. He expressed his desire to avoid the recurrence of such an evil, and all his suggestions pointed that way.

I have thought it necessary to explain this document, to guard against misconception. But in fact Governor Fitzroy's remarks did not apply to the Waitara at all. It is admitted that the people of that district had nothing to do with the sale to the New Zealand Company. (T. Q.p. 20.)

The connection of the argument in the text is missed in the Note. It is therefore necessary to restate it briefly. The letter to William King cited in page 26, and Mr. McLean's notice in page 28, both expressed the new principle quite plainly. Mr. McLean says, You know that every man has a "right (of doing as he pleases) with his portion, "and, no man may interfere to prevent his exercise of this right as respects his portions, for the thought respecting his own is with himself." These declarations were made to a man, with whom the Government had been long dealing as with one whose consent was necessary to the alienation of page 13 land at the Waitara. The new declaration forced him to assert his right in the letter set forth in page 33, and to state the ground of his right, namely, that the land belonged to the whole Community.

I notice that in the third column in this Note, the beginning only of the above sentence of Mr McLean is given, and the conclusion of the very same sentence (distinguished above by Italics) is omitted.