HIS EXCELLENCY MR. SHORTLAND, THE TREATY OF WAITANGI, AND THE WAIROA. MASSACRE.

Daily Southern Cross, Volume I, Issue 19, 26 August 1843, Page 2

HIS EXCELLENCY MR. SHORTLAND, THE TREATY OF WAITANGI, AND THE WAIROA. MASSACRE.

" Awful shape what art thou ? — Speak ?" " I am thy child, and we mast dwell together " Henceforth in darkness.*' — «» Sink witli me then. We two will sink upon the wide waves of ruin." " I sink •* Dizzily down — aver— -for ever — down !"

In perusing the history of colonization in general, it is a most remarkable circumstance that the same principles have been, without a singlo exception, acted upon even until tho present day. New Zealand is perhaps in one respect an exception, but the exception is only in theory, aud not in practice. It however, redounds to tho honour of England, aid of the Marquis of Normanby inparticular, that a more enlightened, and a more humane principle was intended to be carried out in the caso of New Zealand, and it is much to be regretted that the execution of the Marquis of Normanby's humane views should have been entrusted, to men so utterly incompetent for the task, as Captain llobson and his Colonial Secrotary, Mr. Shortland. The new system, or that of treating the aborigines as rational and human beings, who had certain inherent rights and priviloges, which it was illegal, unjust, and unchristian to usurp, was fully and unequivocally recognised in all the instructions given by tho noble Marquis to his servants in this country. Every pretension to New Zealand by virtue of any of the old and barbarous rights of might, power, conquest, and discovery, were abandoned and disclaimed. Captain Hobson was required to assume no higher character in New Zealand than that of British Consul. Ho was not by any means to pretend to exorcise the functions of sovereignty over this country, unless tho natives expressed an intelligent desire to place themselves under tho protection of the Crown of England, in which case, ho was allowed to enter into a fair, honest, and honourable treaty with them for the cession of their sovereignty to tho Crown of England, tho object being clearly understood to bo for the benefit of tho natives. Every right claim or title on the part of the Crown of England, rest upon this treaty (of Waitangi as it is called.) The Crown of England has preferred no other title, and it holds none other, but that which is founded upon the treaty of Waitangi. Unfortunately for Now Zealand, Captain Hobson and his advisers had more of the spirit of a Pizarro and a Cortes, than that of the humane and enlightened Normanby. They were determined to obtain sovereignty at any cost to England, or to humanity ; the lmmano name of Consul was never mentioned in New Zealand. The high-sounding-title of Governor was announced on the first day of landing, as that which the agent of the liurnano Normanby would delight to bo honoured with ; and instead of waiting to ascertain the wishes of the poor natives regarding the object of his mission, Captain llobson immediately set about framing a treaty, which treaty he caused to be sub T mitted to thenatives of the Bay of Islands two or three days after his arrival. By dint of argument, promises, and gifts, somo of the Bay natives were induced to sign this treaty, which neither they, nor their fathers could understand. An agent was dispatched to the coast, who procured the signatures of several natives by bestowing blankets upon such as chose to sign this document. The blanket was first paid, and then the native signed the treaty. The majority of the native chiefs of New Zealand, however, either refused, or never had an opportunity

of signing this famous treaty. The Home Government however, were duly informed that the whole country was ceded to Her Majesty ; and the colonial office was duped by Captain llobson. Moro^Ran two thirds of tho chiefs of New Zeajgid have never signed this famous treaty ; many of those who did sign it received blankets," or other gifts for so doing, not one of ~ them understood the nature or meaning of it, and the treaty itself is a complete tissue of nonsense. The natives surrender nothing whatever, and ! tho Crown of England obtains no more legal or real title by it to the sovereignty of New Zealand, than it had beforo Captain llobson or Mr. Willoughby Shortland, his secretary, were born. In to-day's paper we publish tho official translation of the treaty of Waitangi, or that which is said to have been signed by the natives ; in opposition to the official translation we publish the true and genuine translation from the original Maori. By tho latter our readers will at once perceivo that tho natives have made no surrender of any of their rights and privileges to Captain Hobson or the agents of the British Government. Tho treaty of Waitangi is in truth a hoax imposed upon the British Government by Captain llobson and his advisers, and New Zealand, as far as that treaty is concerned, is no moro a part of the British empire than it was when Captain Cook first landed upon its shores. Tho natives have agreed to give up nothing to the agent of the British Government that has any tangible shape or meaning. The word Kawanatanga they certainly gavo up, but what meaning did tho natives of New Zealand attach to this word, which never existed until Captain Hobson camo hero? and what meaning has this attempt at a word, in any language whatever ? Tho sound was never heard by the natives of New Zealand before, and if they can be supposed to surrender any thing upon the faith of a word which is not, (and if it be) which has no meaning, we leave lawyers to say? We fear that a sovereignty founded upon such a pretext, will be, as it has beeu found to be, based upon a worse than sandy foundation—upon a foundation which must be cemented with blood to keep it_ together. If ever thero was a fraud practised upon the British public, and upon tho Government of England, it has been done by Capt. llobson and his advisers. The deception is not only criminal, but of a most aggravated character. Not only has the Government of England been led astray by this foolish treaty, but hundreds of individuals have, upon tho faith of its existence, been induced to come to New Zealand, under the idea that it had been regularly, and legally ceded to Great Britain. If this view of tho caso bo true, as we doubt not it is, then must it follow that every act of sovereignty which has been exercised by the servants of the British Government, has been illegal and unwarrantable, even upon lands purchased by the servants of the British Government, unless such purchase stipulated the cession of sovereignty over such lands, which wo suspect was never the case. If so, our Courts of Justice, our Police Magistrates, are a perfect, an illegal farce. Our position in this country is precisely that of mere subjects to the native government. We confess that we are something ignorant of tho law of nations on such a point ; but wo know this much, that the case of the British Government on this understanding of the treaty of Waitangi, is precisely the same as would be that of Louis Phillippe, king of the French, provided he had purchased the estates of tho Duke of Northumberland, or New Castle in England. Such a circumstance could nov#r eutitle him to exercise sovereignty over tueso lands, without the consent of tho British Government, neither can tho purchase of the Waitemata entitle Mr. Shortland or tho British Government to exercise sovereignty over the Waitemata, unless stipulated by all the confederated chiefs of New Zealand in such purchase. If this be the case as regards the Waitemata or Auckland, how aro we to act by those concerned in the Weiroa massacre ? Mr. Shortland in the letter to tho Nelson deputation has acknowledged tho recognition of the rights of the natives by Her Majesty. But, from the manner in which the Government has acted since this unhappy affair has occurred; it is quite plain that even Mr. Shortland himself regards the nativos of New Zealand as foreigners, and not as British subjects. Had they been viewed as British subjects, an investigation in accordance with English law, would have been immediately ordered to take place. No such investigation has been made. The Weiroa affair appears by the conduct of this Government to bo looked upon in the light of a skirmish between the hostile subjects of two independent nations ; and we suppose that the propriety or expediency of declaring war against the tribes of New Zealand, or such of them as were engaged in, and sanctioned this affair, will be referred to the Home

Government. But whatever Mr. Shortlaud's views are on these subjects, tho public have a right to be made acquainted with thoso of the Law Officer of the Crown in this Colony. It is his business to inform the subjects of the Crown of England of the legal footing on which they and tho natives of New Zealand stand in regard to one another. We ask Mr. Swainson to inform the public as to whether the natives of New Zealand are, or aro not British subjects ? We ask him to explain to us the legal meaning of the treaty of Waitangi ? And wo ask him to say whether the Weiroa massacre is looked upon as a subject for investigation by English law, or whether it is viewed as an attack by somo of the subjects of two independent countries upon one another. In either case, wo require him to advise Mr. Shortland how to act. If the natives of New Zealand aro British subjects, then why arc they not made amenable to British law ? If they are foreigners, why are they permitted with impunity to wago war against the Crown of England, and to" kill, and murder British subjects? In cither casa the authority and power of tho Crown of England arc insulted, and trampled upon. But in truth, it matters little what the