Hawke's Bay Times. MONDAY, DECEMBER 30, 1867. "THE MANAWATU PURCHASE COMPLETED, OR THE TREATY OF WAITANGI BROKEN.”

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume XII, Issue 538, 30 December 1867, Page 2

Hawke's Bay Times.

MONDAY, DECEMBER 30, 1867. "THE MANAWATU PURCHASE COMPLETED, OR THE TREATY OF WAITANGI BROKEN.”

“A nf/, us addict ns j marc in verba maghtri.

A pamphlet of some seventy-two pages, bearing the above title, lias recently been issued from the New Zealand press from the pen of T. CWilliams, “a native of New Zealand,” —such the author styles himself, although it appears from the preface to the work that lie is the son of Archdeacon Henry Williams, one of the earliest of the Church of England missionaries in New Zealand. So far, then, it appears doubtful why he should call himself a native, being one only in the same sense as that in which the sons and daughters of the settlers are natives, whom we should hardly expect to see announcing the fact in tho manner Air Williams has done.

It may be, however, that he so far identifies htmself with the Maori race as to cast in his lot with them, and advocates that which he believes their cause as one of them wives. Yet this can hardly be, for we find him constantly forgetting that he is a native himself, when, writing of the Maoris, he calls them “ the natives.” This continually occurs throughout the work.

Wc need scarcely say that the object of the pamphlet is to create an impression that injustice has been done to certain natives in the case of the recent purchase of a block of land, known as the Manawatu block, from them—as the title of the work sufficiently indicates it. To this end a mass of letters, &c., are brought together iu what appears to us a confused manner; and tve fear that those who are ignorant of the merits of the case will not derive much enlightenment from the pamphlet. That our readers may know what it is all about we give them a short outline of the story. Previous to the establishment of the Queen's sovereignty over these islands —and, indeed, to the arrival of the first missionaries, —a northern tribe of Maoris (the Ngatiraukawaj had invaded the southern districts, and conquered the tribe (among others) which inhabited the Manawatu distinct (the Ngatiapa.) The missionaries, it seems, induced the conquerors, after their quasi conversion, to allow the conquered tribes to return, and in some sense repossess the district from which they had been expelled ; and for a long series of years the conquerors and the conquered have been living side by side there.

No formal act of restitution appears to have been ever made, nor did it occur to either party as necessary; but at a time when extensive illegal dealings with natives for the use of sheep runs were carried on hy the squatters, it seems that the conquered] tribe was permitted to receive a share] of the rents. So things went on until j the passing of the Native Lands Act' by the Colonial Government, wdiich S rendered the dealing with natives for] land legal. This particular block, *

however, was excepted from the operation of that Act fur two reasons —Ist. because of the impossibility of deciding between the claimants ; and. 2nd, because the purchase by the Provincial Government of Wellington of that block had been partly accomplished, and it was considered best to allow the negotiations to be completed. Disputes between rival claimants for the land bought by the Government, such as theabove,havebeeubynomeans rare, and the Government has generally managed to cut the Gordian kuot of difficulty by buying off all the claimants, and so effecting a satisfactory solution of what otherwise could not be settled. It has been no uncommon thing fur a fresh claimant to come forward and resist our possession of land which lias been again and again paid for. Sometimes the land has been given up and the original purchase money forfeited, as was the case at Taranaki; but the more general mode has been to buy up the claims of all the contending parties. In the present case there are hut one or two of the dissentient tribe (the conquerors) who refuse to accept a cash payment for their share iu the Mauawatu block. The principal of these is Parakaia, whose claim is insignificant iu itself, hut who does not relish the idea of relinquishing the honor of holding a part ownership of a i large block of country, and being rejduced to the level of a small landlord ; hence the figure lie ruts throughout the pamphlet of Mr Williams. Mr Williams argues—“ at the time of the execution of the Treaty of Wai I tangi the Ngaliraukawa held possession I sion in right of conquest this particular! block of land ; that permitting the re ! turn of the conquered people was an act of grace ou their pari, and does not ati’ect their rights; and that the refusal of a single individual as Parakaia’ to agree to sell the land must prevent; its alienation/’ We are afraid thatj

Mr 'Williams Imre takes ground tLat 1 destroys the value of the Treaty ofi Waitangi itself, of which he makes soj much. Suppose the conquered people j to say, as we fancy they might, “ Our lands were stolen ; we did not relinquish our right to them, hut looked to be reinstated by the British Government in hinds we had just been turned! off, and being allowed to return were j satisfied”; or suppose them to say,j “ show that we were parties to that Treaty you speak of—did Xgatiapa sign it ? ” Could he prove that he did ? or if Parakaia's refusal to consent nullities tho sale, does not the non-assent of such chiefs as refused to sign the Treaty nullify it'? and it is well enough known that all the chiefs who had a voice in the matter did not

sign. Mr Williams disposes of tbe buyers iu a manner truly cavalierly. Of Sir Geoige Grey and Ministers be says : —“ They may have proved themselves capable of framing laws for the good government of cattle and sheep, but have proved wholly incompetent to the task of governing human beings, when those human beings are Maoris.” Of Dr. Featherston he says—“ He is a gentleman who wept over the Waitara, and considered it. his task to make the dying couch of the Maori as easy as possible—professing to be their friend, who had ever advocated their true interests ; and at the same time exclaiming that he had no sympathy with the wretches, and did not care how soon they were exterminated.’” Of Mr Walter Buller —“ He is a model official; at all times ready and willing to say and do all and everything be is bid, and who has repeatedly said that he is prepared to go any [lengths to ensure the Manawatu muchase.” f 1

Mr Williams has been unfortunate in his endeavours to get his pamphlet before the public. ■ In a postscript, —from which we take the first clause, in order to afford our readers a specimen of the peculiarly florid style iu which such portions of the pamphlet as are original are written, —he says;— The foregoing was prepared for the press in July Advertiser uuderiuuk iu pnul il iu u Kw Javs. Their promises were faithfully repeated, as faithfully .broken. The proprietor of the New Zealand Times undertook the job. Shortly afterwards lie failed. Some good Samaritan has now taken the matter in hand. The suuth-easters blow heavily over the waters of Pori Nicholson. Wellington is an interesting city. Its inhabitants far more so. —The delay has enabled him to give extracts showing that Parakaia has now an opportunity of appealing to the Native Lauds Court, aud showing what portion of the block he is entitled to, for which he will have a crown grant issued to him, and then can sell or not as he likes best. Of course this is most unsatisfactory to him and Mr Williams. Parakaia has a vague claim in part ownership over the whole ; in fact, he says, much as Wi Kingi did of Teira’s land at Waitara, “ it is his, but 1 will not let him sell it.” Parakaia and his party will not define their claims, nor accept the Commissioner’s award, but assert a general claim iu common with those who have sold to the whole of the block. The Governor, however, is empowered by a recent Act of the General Assembly to fix a special sitting of the Native Lands Court at which all claims to laud iu this block must be proved, and its decision will be final. For aught we know the question is ere this at rest.

For the present we take our leave of Air Williams’ book. There is a vein of argument, or allusion, running through it relating to the government of the Maoris, which we shall probably take occasion to refer to at another lime.