Other formats

    TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

The Pamphlet Collection of Sir Robert Stout: Rare Volume

Chapter II. — What the Missionaries say of the New-Zealand War

Chapter II.

What the Missionaries say of the New-Zealand War.

The position which the leading Missionaries have taken up in connection with the present war in New Zealand reflects the greatest credit upon their characters as Christian men. We know that if they had studied self-interest—if they had been guided by the lower passions of human nature—they might have found a very easy road to official favour, by casting in their lot with the war party, or by observing what some might be disposed to regard as a prudent reticence. For there are some who, even when a Missionary expresses an opinion upon a question like this, accuse him of meddling with politics, and of interfering with matters which do not belong to his profession; as if it was not one of his most solemn duties to interest himself actively in questions which concern not only the properties, but the very existence of those for whose especial benefit he has travelled to the ends of the earth. Mr. Hadfield, the Member for Sheffield, from whom we should have expected better things, has adopted the narrow view of Missionary duty against which we protest; and in the very last discussion on the New-Zealand Bill which took place in the House of Commons, he spoke of the interference of the Colonial Clergy, with the questions dealt with in that measure, in language of ridicule and condemnation, Now, with all respect for Mr. Hadfield, and with a due appreciation of the value of his public services, we must dissent in toto from the doctrine which he thus laid down. We have already referred to the fact, that Missionaries are sent out to distant countries mainly for the purpose of elevating and protecting the Aborigines. They might, perhaps, be denounced if they intermeddled with some question of land or public works, or electoral privilege, in which the colonists themselves were exclusively interested, but seeing that the natives naturally look up to them for guidance; that the jealousies between the two races require to be restrained by some intermediate influences respected alike by both; and that collisions between them would necessarily be most fatal to the Missionary work; we are bound, in regard to aboriginal questions, to take a much broader view of the duty of those who go forth to preach the Gospel. Upon this principle many of the clergy in New Zealand, from the good Bishop page 28 Selwyn downwards, have acted; and it affords us peculiar pleasure to offer this testimony to their unflinching fidelity and courageous zeal. From the outset of the present war in New Zealand—we will not call it "rebellion," for that would be a perversion of the language—the clergy, through their recognised leaders, have faithfully and earnestly exposed the injustice and oppression of which the authorities have been guilty. In the first instance they remonstrated with the local Government; they drew up protests they appealed to the public conscience; but, unhappily, all in vain. Colonel Browne and his advisers had too deliberately entered upon the evil path, and old passions and hatreds had been too deeply aroused for the voice of reason and justice to exercise its legitimate authority. The clergy have therefore appealed from the lesser tribunal to the higher, that is, from the Governor to the Minister, from the inhabitants of the colony to the British people.

Archdeacon Hadfield's "Letter to the Duke of Newcastle"* ought to be in the hands of every Member of Parliament, Minister of the Gospel, and English citizen, who is solicitous for the honour of his country, or desirous of performing his duty in relation to it But as such a result is not at all likely to happen, we wish to contribute, as far as lies in our power, to the general diffusion of the fact3 narrated in Mr. Hadfield's pamphlet; and in doing so, we do not bespeak attention for a man whose acquaintance with New Zealand began with yesterday, or whose claims to public confidence admit of any doubt, Mr. Hadfield has lived in New Zealand upwards of twenty years, and the highest testimony has been paid to his experience and public services; Mr. Swainson, formerly Attorney-General for the colony, affirming, in his work published last year, that during the first collision with the natives in 1840, "Wellington owed its safety at that moment to a single individual, the Rev. Octavius Hadfield." The opinion of such a man upon the present war, especially when it is based upon an evident knowledge of all the facts necessary to form a righteous judgment, is entitled to the highest consideration and respect. What, then, does Mr, Hadfield say in his pamphlet?

In the first place, he explains his reasons for addressing the Duke. They are briefly a conviction on his part of the injustice of Colonel Browne's proceedings towards Wiremu Kingi; the fact that he has attached his name to a statement prepared by the Bishop of Wellington, and addressed to His Grace; his personal knowledge of "the rebel" chief for more than twenty years; the attention which he has long devoted to the subject of native titles; and the assurance, which he has repeatedly given to the chiefs, Wiremu Kingi among the number, that the British Govern-

* Published by Williams and Norgate, Henrietta Street, Covent Garden.

page 29 ment would never unjustly seize their lands. Mr. Hadfield then explains, in general terms, the nature of the question now in dispute:—

"The question at issue is simply this—Is a native chief to be forcibly ejected from his land, because an individual member of his tribe tells a subordinate land-agent that it is his, and not the chiefs, and that agent believes him? The Governor says,' Yes; 'the chiefs say,' No, We have resigned our sovereignty to Her Majesty the Queen; and in return for (hat, Her Majesty has guaranteed to us the protection of the law. We claim to have disputed titles to land, which it is desired to purchase, decided in some competent court on evidence given upon oath; for we have never consented, and we will never submit, to have the titles to the land on which we live, and on which we cultivate the food for our subsistence, decided by a mere subordinate land-agent, interested in acquiring land, and resting his decision on the bare assertion of a man of no note or rank in the tribe. This is really the question at issue between the Governor and William King."

Mr. Hadfield then explains the origin of the quarrel. He first accounts for Wiremu Kingi's unwillingness to dispose of the land in question, by stating that his father, the great Chief Rangita-whanga, of Taranaki, exacted from him a pledge that he would not sell Waitara. He next shews the existence of an ill-feeling between him and Teira, the pretended owner of the land, and the author of all the mischief, arising from the circumstance of a girl, who was affianced to the latter's brother, having preferred Wiremu Kingi's son, and married him. It was under the influence of revengeful feelings, the offspring of these circumstances, that when, in March of last year, the Governor visited Taranaki, Teira offered to sell the land, whereupon Wiremu Kingi protested against the sale in these words:—

"'Listen, Governor, notwithstanding Teira's offer, I will not permit the sale of Waitara to the Pakeha. Waitara is in my hands: I will not give up, I will not, I will not, I will not.' He and his followers abruptly withdrew."

Let us see what ensued :—

"In defiance of all remonstrance on the part of William King and other owners of the land, the purchase was made by the District Commissioner, Mr. Parris. I again cite the Governor's document (page 3) : 'Soon after the receipt of Mr. Parris's letter of the 4th December, the Governor in Council gave directions for the survey of the land. Accordingly, on the 20th February the survey was attempted by a small unarmed party, but was put a stop to by a crowd of King's people.' The survey was actually interrupted by women, it being William King's object not to break the peace, but to act legally—that is, to remove trespassers, but to do so without violence. He wished merely to assert his ownership to the land. It is seen above that the survey was first attempted on the 20th February. Will it, then, be believed that a Proclamation of martial law, dated Auckland, January 25th, had already been placed in the hands of a subordinate officer, commanding at Taranaki, to be used at his discretion, though no overt act whatever had at that time been committed? It is difficult to imagine what justification will be given for such an unusual course. Shortly afterwards the land was occupied by the troops, and the natives page 30 retreated to the woods. They returned, and erected a small stockade on the disputed land. Here the first collision took place; after which they evacuated the stockade, and returned again to the woods. The Governor, however, has been attacked by natives of other tribes, who sympathized with William King, but who acted without any orden from him."

Mr, Hadfield next proceeds to an examination of the grounds, publicly set forth by the Governor in justification of these extraordinary acts of coercion. "It is stated," says Mr, Hadfield, "that the land belonged to Teira and a few other persons, who were the real owners, and who have sold it to the Government; that Teira's title to the land was 'carefully investigated, and found to be good;' that William King, and those who acted with him, had no title to it; that 'William King never pretended to deny Teira's right of property, but insisted on his own right to put a veto on all sales at Waitara.' I deny the truth of all the statements."

Much has been said, in a loose way, both in the English and in the New-Zealand papers, about the Waikatos having dispossessed the Ngatiawa (Wiremu Kingi's tribe) of the land at Waitara; the latter, according to native custom, thereby ceasing to be its owners. But to this Mr. Hadfield returns a most conclusive answer. It is, that the Waikatos never held possession of the land; that Wiremu Kingi himself was never conquered; that before the constitution of New Zealand into a colony, this chief apprised Mr. Hadfield of his intention to re-occupy the land; and, lastly, that there is no dispute whatever between the two tribes above named, but that the dispute is between members of the Ngatiawa tribe alone.

Now with regard to Teira's right to sell the land, which is, after all, the chief question at issue. We should be disposed to rest the case upon the simple fact stated by Mr. Hadfield, that Teira's father, Tamati Raru, through whom alone the son could inherit any portion of the land, stedfastly opposed its alienation, and supported Wiremu Kingi in the resistance he offered to that proceeding. Mr, Hadfield then deals with the Governor's statement, that 'William King never denied Teira's right of property :—

"It is true Mr. Parris, the District Commissionar, says, that in answer to his question, 'Does the land belong to Teira and his party?' he replied, 'Yes; the land is theirs, but I will not let them sell it.' I am credibly informed that the chief did not intend to convey the meaning here attributed to him; that what he said was, that Teira and his party were part owners of the land, but that did not justify them in selling the whole. I can easily conceive how such a mistake wonld arise, as it is quite in accordance with the idiom of the Maori language to begin an objection by. Yes,' i.e. You are right to a certain extent, but, &c. And that was exactly the chiefs meaning; 'Teira has a right to a small part, but he wishes to avail himself of that to establish a claim to the whole block of land now under discussion, and that I will not allow him to do 'Here the irregularity of the whole proceeding appears; for had such a question been put in a court of law, and the alleged answer been returned, William King's counsel would have taken care that no inference prejudicial to his interests should be drawn from it."

page 31
There is another statement made by the Governor in self-justification, which, as it may possibly be repeated in this country, deserves special notice :—

"The document proceeds:—' As to the possession, the facts of the case are, that when King returned to Taranaki from Waikanae, in 1848, being in fear of an invasion of the Waikatos from the north, he asked permission of Tamati Raru, Teira's father, to build a pa upon the piece of land on the south bank of Waitara, now sold to the British Government. Permission was granted, and King's pa was erected on the south bank, his cultivations being on the north bank. King's followers have, however, encroached with their cultivations upon the south side of the river; and these encroachments have been, for a long time, a source of continual dissension.' It is true that King did ask Raru's permission to build a pa on a piece of land belonging to him. But what, let me ask, is the impression the passage just cited is intended to convey? Assuredly a very false one. The only possible construction to be put on these words is, that William King and his 'followers'—as his tribe seems to be designated—having no land of their own on the south side of the river, took advantage of a concession made to them for their personal security to encroach on property to which they had no right. But I have before asserted that they were the owners of by far the largest portion of this land, which they had inherited from their ancestors, and which is subdivided and accurately marked with stone posts. What, then, is the one particle of truth on which this false statement is built? It is simply this, that King consulted his friend Raru as to whether the pa, in which, for their mutual security—they all belonging to one tribe-—were about to reside, should stand a few chains nearer to the water-side than it would have stood had it been erected on his own land on the same side of the river. I can only characterize this statement as disgraceful to an official document, whether the error arose from ignorance, or wilful misrepresentation."

Enough has been quoted to shew the thorough injustice and impolicy of the present war. Our readers can perceive at a glance how frivolous are the pretexts under which that war has been commenced, The ownership of a certain block of land—six hundred acres in extent—is disputed, or, at all events, the right of Teira to sell it is called in question. Was not this a proper matter for investigation? And before any attempt was made to survey the land, and before the Government committed itself to the cause of Teira, ought not this question to have been settled, if possible, to the satisfaction of all parties, or at least with an eye to justice? But the whole transaction, we are told, was left in the hands of Mr. Parris, the District Land Commissioner, "whose business is to purchase land, and who, by the very nature of his office, is disqualified, in the estimation of the natives, impartially to investigate claims to land." It is difficult to conceive of a more complete subversion of all the principles of justice than this:—of a state of things more calculated to provoke collisions with the natives, or to tempt a subordinate official to the assumption of an authority, which, as in the present case, would naturally lead to wide-spread disaffection, Moreover, the Governor had distinctly pledged himself at Tara-naki, in March 1859, "that he would never consent to buy land without an undisputed title," Surely, therefore, some motive must page 32 have prompted the quarrel with Wiremu Kingi very different from that which appears on the surface.

Mr. Hadfield pays the highest tribute to the loyalty and good faith Which Wiremu Kingi has always exhibited in his relations with Europeans. He denies that the chief had ever attached himself to any land league, whose object it was to prevent the sale of land. He asserts that the chief had always discountenanced—indeed "strenuously and effectively resisted"—the Maori king movement. He attributes to Wiremu Kingi's exertions the safety of Wellington, when its very existence was threatened, during the disturbances of 1840; and he declares that, later still, in 1846, he took up arms on the side of the Government, and against the rebel chief Te Rangihaeta. The loyalty of this man would, we believe, have remained as firm as a rock, if it had not been cruelly shaken by a display of unprovoked injustice. Let our readers remember this—whatever the anti-native party, or its organs in the press, may say to the contrary—that Wiremu Kingi is fighting against us, not because he has mixed himself up with the king movement or land monopolies, but simply and solely because a British Governor, without any attempt at inquiry, and acting upon the necessarily prejudiced reports of a local official, deprived the chief of a piece of land to which he believed he had an indisputable claim.

The views expressed by Mr. Hadfield appear to be generally shared in by his clerical brethren. The following letter was written by Archdeacon Kissling, who has been for eighteen years a Missionary in New Zealand. It is a valuable confirmation of Mr. Hadfield's narrative :—

"Auckland,

"By the last mail I wrote that 'martial law' had been proclaimed in the Province of Taranaki, I forget whether I entered then into the precise origin of the dispute between the Governor and the natives, indulging, as I did, in the hope that the dark cloud would soon pass away. Indeed, there hare appeared a few light streaks in our dark horizon, to cheer our eyes and encourage our prayers, but they have been of very short duration. The aspect of affairs in New Zealand does certainly not improve : we have ground to fear that we are drifting into war, upon the effect and issue of which it is impassible to speculate; and it becomes absolutely necessary that regular and correct information be given to the Society of the passing events, inasmuch as they, both directly and indirectly, deeply affect our whole Mission in Hew Zealand.

"In stating the origin of the present martial operations in the district of Taranaki, we must commence with Wiremu Kingi, who figures on the Maori side. His native name is Rangitoake, and his father was the great chief Rangitawhangawhanga of Taranaki. Raogitoake accompanied his father about a quarter of a century ago to fight the natives of Waikanae, Otake, and Wairarapa: he was subsequently baptized by the Ven. Archdeacon Henry Williams, taking the name by which he is now generally known, namely. Wiremu Kingi. Upon the formation of this colony he became a faithful ally to the English, and saved Wellington fifteen years ago, when the settlement was attacked by other native tribes. The Rev Samuel Williams informs me, that when Wiremu Kingi resided at Waikanae, he never failed to be in his page 33 place at church, and took, as teacher, his class in the Sunday - school. About ten years ago, he returned with his people to the abode of his ancestors, occupying a fertile block of land known by the name of 'Waitara,' to the north of New Plymonth. This block of land was subdivided by the natives who returned from Waikanae into numerous patches, containing one acre, two acres, &c. &c.

"On the Governor's visit to Taranaki in March 1859, he made use of the following words, in the conclusion of his speech to the natives:—' In reference to the second subject, the Governor thought the Maories would be wise to sell the land they cannot use themselves, as it would make what they could use more valuable than the whole; but that he would never consent to buy land without an undisputed title. He would not permit any one to interfere in the sale of land unless he owned part of it; and, on the oilier hand, he would buy no man's land without his consent.'

"This language of the Governor's has been considered by the Maori chiefs as striking at the very root of their power; for although they may not own part of some land personally, they consider that they have a right to interfere on tribal grounds, and as lords of the manor. There can be no doubt, that if the doctrine above laid down by His Excellency be carried into practice, New Zealand will be involved in warfare, to which we can see no end, Every man who has a spite against his chief or neighbour will revenge himself by offering land for sale, to which he has an undisputed right as an individual, but not as one of the tribe, or as one who respects his chief. Here is obviously a source opened of fruitful quarrels and warfare without end,

"When the Governor had finished his address to the natives, Te Teira, a Waitara native, immediately offered the block of land for sale, which has already cost so much blood and treasure. The purchase was concluded, and Wiremu Kingi, as chief, protested against it. It is stated by Wiremu Kingi's party, that Te Teira did it from feelings of iilwill and revenge.

"On December 4th, 1859, Mr. Parris, the District Commissioner, informed the Governor that he had paid the first instalment (1001.) of the purchase-money to Te Teira, and the Governor gave directions for the survey of the land, The Governor also forwarded power to the military officer in command of the military at Taranaki to proclaim martial law, leaving it to his discretion, when to proceed to such extreme measures. Whether this power was wisely given wilt be seen presently. On the 20th of February 1860, the survey was attempted, Wiremu Kingi made no attack upon the surveying officers; but some women from his pa went out and 'hugged,' or embraced them, telling them not to survey the land. Some of these women also are said to have held the chain. Upon this, martial law was proclaimed. When the report of martial Jaw having been put in force reached Auckland, the Governor hastened to Taranaki with the troops stationed in Auckland, and Her Majesty's Steam Ship The Niger. He arrived there on the 1st of March 1860, and requested Wiremu Kingi to come into the town: this, under the circumstances of the case Wiremu refused to do, but asked the Governor to come to his pa, assuring him safety.* On the 5th of March the troops were removed to the Waitara block of land. Two of Wiremu Kingi's pas were consumed and destroyed. Government says they were fired by Te Teira's party; Wiremu Kingi's followers say it was done by the troops; and thus the painful struggle commenced.

"It has never been asserted by any party that the natives made the first stroke, but, on the contrary, they have carefully avoided it to be said that they commenced the warfare. It is clear that the Governor, by his address to the

* Wiremu Kingi is reported to have said, "I will not be caught at Rau-paraha was."

page 34 principal chiefs on March 12th, 1859, and by the subsequent purchase of the Waitara block from Te Teira (500 acres), has, in the opinion of all natives whom I have yet heard on the subject, made a commencement of breaking their old feudal and clannish rights, which have been sanctioned amongst them by habits and customs from time immemorial, and that he has attempted to enforce this dangerous policy by a method unprecedented in the Government of New Zealand.

"Without availing himself of any moral or religious influence from those who would most willingly have come to his assistance to preserve the peace of the country, he thought he could put down the opposition of Wiremu Kingi by the demonstration of force of arms. This novel course of proceedings with the natives, as every old Missionary could have told it beforehand, has totally failed. The native race is not one which can be subdued by intimidation: they will lay down their necks one by one, and have them cut off, before they will part with their rights and their lands. In this respect they are reckless of life.

"The paternal and judicious system, contemptuously called by the violent party 'the tea and sugar policy,' is to be abandoned, and the settlers pouring in by thousands are to have the waste land of New Zealand at any price, should it even be the extermination of the entire aboriginal people. The various provinces in New Zealand, with jealous endeavours, invite immigrants from all parts of the world; and as these reach our shores, week after week and month after month, In high expectation of enjoying at once the land that is said to flow with milk and honey, and being: disappointed in their dreams, they join the selfish portion of the white population in their cry, 'Down with the natives, we must have their unoccupied lands; civilization cannot be stopped on account of a savage race.' The responsible Ministry is controlled by such & populace; the Governor is influenced and guided by such a responsible Ministry, and the native race must go to the wall. And the names of your Missionaries will be cast out as evil, and represented as traitors to the Government,—See Southern Cross, herewith sent.

"We need the spirit of wisdom, of prayer, and of a found and firm mind. I have not met any Christian natives who do not bitterly regret that a breach of peace should have been made between the two races; at the same time there is a deep tone of feeling throughout the country to stand upon what they consider their rights. The murders committed by the Ngatiruanui tribe, south of Taranaki, in connection with the Wesleyan Mission, I believe, are entirely repudiated by Wiremu Kingi, and no native with whom I have ever conversed on the subject has attempted to defend the barbarous conduct: it is a matter of shame to them.