To the Editor of the New Zealand Spectator.

New Zealand Spectator and Cook's Strait Guardian, Volume I, Issue 48, 6 September 1845, Page 3

To the Editor of the New Zealand Spectator.

River Hutt, September 4th, 1845. Sir, — Can any of your readers inform me why £ Puni, who has always^en considered a friend^ tifcthe settlers, has permitted two of his nativfcr'toitHspossess a settler of his land at Petofti? '• You* obedient servant, "jSTHuTf Settler.

Captain Fitzroy's h Proceedings in Gouncil. — There is one^view of Captain Fitzroy's policy which our contemporaries do not seem to have entered into ; viz. his repudiation of the Queen's claim to the waste lands in favour of the natives. This, in the present crisis of our relations with the French Government, seems to us of the greatest importance. Let us take, for instance, the ground of our sovereignty over the Middle Island; unquestionably the more valuable of the two for the purposes of colonization. <4c*cording to Captain Fitzroy's doctrine, we claim this only by right of discovery ; — we have no claims to the soil, except as purchased from the natives. By whom was this island differed ? By Cook, in his first voyage. In this very same voyage he discovered Tahiti, yet we repudiate the sovereignty of Tahiti, but claim that of the Middle Island of New Zealand ; though we give up all claim to its soil. Had Capt. Fitzroy's repudiation of ;er Majesty's right of pre-emption reached France before the close of the sittings of the Chamber of Deputies, there is little doubt but the debates on New Zealand would have taken a very different turn. "What may we not expect from the next sittings of the French Chambers. The French Government is well known to have keen-sighted emissaries in New Zealand, in the persons of the Catholic bishop and missionaries ; they will not be likely to overlook such an advantage as Captain Fitzroy has here presented to them. It is true, that the Colonial Office has carefully withheld from their recently published report all official accounts of Captain Fitzroy's proceedings in this respect, yet sufficient has transpired in his Excellency's proclamations to put the French Government on the gui vive with regard to those tiaosactions ; and what will be their argument ? That the English nation had certainly the priority of discovery, both as regards Tahiti and New Zealand, yet in neither do they claim the sovereignty of the soil ; contenting themselves merely with acting as protectors to the natives. The Governor of New Zealand has himself proclaimed this, giving his Queen as his authority. In Tahiti they have consented to become joint-protectors with ourselves; their right to the Middle Island of New Zealand s, according to Captain Fitzroy's own proclamations, of a similar nature to that of Tahiti, and why should they not be admitted to a joint- protectorate of that also ? It will puzzle Lord Stanley, after what Captain Fitzroy has done, to find a suitable reply to this argument ; even such a one as will satisfy M. Guizot; whilst to M. Billault, and others of that clique, it will furnish a stronger ground than the instance of St. Christopher's. The fact is, and there cau be little question about the matter, that Captain Fitzroy, in his anxiety to keep down the Cook's Strait settlers has got us into a very serious scrape with. France ; which nation, if Capt. Fitzroy's repudiation of the Queen's right of pre-emption is allowed by the Colonial Office, has as much and as valid a claim to Akaroa as we have to Nelson ; a right which the French Government seems disposed to maintain, by keeping a frigate constantly at that station. New Zealand is in truth a sad mess. Repudiated, even as by right of discovery, by Lord Normanby. Taken possession of by Capt. Hobson, by right of discovery, with full powers of pre-emption, preserved to her Majesty. Retained by Capt. Fitzroy, with her Majesty's right of preemption waived, — it is difficult to say what phase she is next to undergo. How true it is that no one can calculate the extent of a wilful wrong. It would be small consolation to Mr. Dandeson Coates and his coadjutors, we should imagine, if Capt. Fitzroy's act, dictated by their party, should involve us in a war with France, and putting a complete stop to the extension of civilization, Yet that this will be the case, or that disgraceful concet-

■ions must be made to France by our Cabinet, we much fear. Lord Aber !een and M. Guizot may not always be the foreign ministers of their respective countries. With Lord Palmerston and M. Thiers in office, it requires no prophet to predict what would be the vi&ws taken, and acted upon by both Governments with regard to New Zealand. It is trup, that M. Lamartine has said of Tahiti, that it is a mere shoal, — not worth fighting for ; in which we agree with him ; but he would not say this of New Zealand ; or if he did, his own friends would laugh at him. M. Guizot has said that the next seat of war would be in the Pacific. The Islands of New Zealand are the only ones in the Pacific which (with splendid harbours) produce timber, flax, and every other requisite for refitting ships ; the others being little more than coral reefs, or the summits of extinct volcanoes. The immortal Cook has recorded his opinion of the first-rate qualities of New Zealand timber for ship-building. New Zealand masts are well known and appreciated in our dockyards ; no others being available nearer than Singapore, and those inferior ; — and ys?' £ man like Captain Fitzroy is permitted to endanger our possession of these most valuable islands, by acts the most unprecedented and uncalled for. Shame on our Government. — New Zealand Journal.