New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) FRIDAY, AUGUST 11.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 4801, 11 August 1876, Page 2

New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) FRIDAY, AUGUST 11.

Sir George Grey’s memory must, be singularly treacherous. If it were not so, we should not find throughout his recent utterances in Parliament so many glaring instances of gross obliviouaness of past events in which he was a principal actor. This unfortunate trait in his character is not new to old colonists familiar with his former career in New Zealand, but young members of Parliament, and men whose acquaintance with New Zealand politics dates only a few years back, are likely to be led away by the philanthropic prof essions which Sir George Grey so frequently makes, and by that air of apparent ingenuousness with which he contrives to clothe misstatements and misrepresentations. His recent speech on the separation resolutions teems with instances of this sort. We will take one. Referring to the Constitution of this colony, he is reported in Hansard to have said; —

Now with regard to the Constitution which was given to New Zealand, let mo illustrate what I mean by what will be no breach of confidence, because I am about to state that which was stated in both Houses of Parliament in Great Britain. ■When a Constitution was about to be conferred in this colony, the Secretary of State who had approved that Constitution informed me that it would, by his Government, which was then In a majority in the House of Commons, bo carried immediately through Parliament. I received from that Secretary of State a letter telling me that a Constitution would be established in New Zealand, which would have given an elective Upper House to the country, and which I believe by that means would have prevented every one of the difficulties by which wo are now encompassed. Some time after I received that letter —communication with Great Britain being then very difficult—l received a letter from another Minister, Sir John Pakington, informing me that She had taken the seals of the Colonial department, that a new Ministry was in office, and he went on to add that, as objections existed to the Constitution proposed to be given to New Zealand, it was doubtful whether her Majesty’s advisors would now go on with the measure, and directing me, as prejudicial results might follow if the colonists were disappointed in their expectations, to take care not to make public the intentions regarding the proposed New Zealand Constitution which had been imparted to me by Earl Grey. Honorable gentlemen will therefore see that the Government at Home believed they were about to take from the colony an advantage that its inhabitants might be unwilling to lose without the people here having any notice of such an intention being entertained ; and in doing so they only followed the customs of the time in dealing with colonial possessions. The lips of the Governor were sealed in reference to that subject, and the people were kept in ignorance of what I may describe as the great ill it was intended ttf inflict upon them.

The object of the above remarks is clearly to cast the blame of the delay which took place in the introduction of representative institutions into this country upon Sir John Pakington and the Ministry of that day. Sir George Grey very modestly overlooks his own share in that memorable business, but we shall endeavor by a few quotations from the official Blue Books to refresh his memory on the subject. We may preface those quotations by stating that the Governor originally held despotic powers under a charter from the Crown. The time however arrived when wise and experienced British statesmen considered that the colony was ripe for the introduction of representative institutions. Sir Robert Peel said in the House of Commons during the debates on New Zealand on the 17th June, 1845 :—“I am strongly inclined to think that representatives institutions are suited for the condition of the people of that colony.” Lord John Rossell said;—“ The voice of the settlers themselves, speaking through their representatives, could alone extricate the colony from the difficulties in which it was plunged.” Earl Grey (then Lord Ho wick) hoped they would re vert to the ancient and wise policy of their ancestors, and allow the colonists to govern themselves. And lastly, Mr. B. Hawes, M.P., said: “ They must lay the foundations of local government, and the colony, left as free as possible, would soon display the energy of the parent stock. The remedy he proposed was simply this : that the colonists should have local self-govern-ment.” Accordingly in 1846 the New Zealand Constitution Act was passed by the Imperial Parliament, and was sent out to Sir George Grey, then Governor of New Zealand. We quote from Mr. Fox’s memorandum to Earl Grey of January 24, 1852 :

It reached the colony in 18-47, and the colonists soon became acquainted with Us nature, though it was not officially promulgated. It remained for several months without any intimation of the intentions of the Government respecting it; its meditated suspension, and the grounds on which such suspension had been recommended by Governor Grey, became first known by accident upon the publication of Earl Grey's despatch to Sir George Grey in 1848. Earl Grey to Sir George Grey, Feb. 23, 1852. The New Zealand Constitution Act of 1846, together with the charter and instructions issued in consequence, so far as related to the establishment of representative institutions, was suspended for five years in 1848 In consequence of the representations made by yourselves, on the danger of introducing those institutions, in part at least of the islands, at that particular juncture.

We shall not now touch upon the reasons which were urged by Sir George Grey in recommending this step. Suffice it to say that they were condemned as soon as they become known by the unani-mous-voice of the colonists, and were afterwards admitted by Sir George Grey himself to have been utterly unfounded. The effect of the suspension of the Constitution was a continuance of the old form of government under the charter of 1840, vesting the legislative power in the Governor-General and a Council consisting of three of his principal Executive officers and three official nominees. As to Sir John Pakington’s share in delaying the Constitution, he does not appear to have been in any way concerned in the matter until 1852, when he succeeded Earl Grey as Secretary for the Colonies. On the 10th April, 1852, we find him writing to Sir George Grey :

I wish to inform you that her Majesty’s Government are anxious if possible to fulfil the announcement contained in her Majesty’s speech at the opening of the session. With a sincere desire to satisfy the wishes of the inhabitants of New Zealand upon this subject at as early a period as possible, they have now under consideration a measure for granting representative institatlons to the colony.

What the colonists themselves thought of Sir George Grey’s conduct in recommending the suspension of the Constitution, is abundantly manifest from a perusal of the Blue Books, which teem with complaints and petitions against the arbitrary conduct of the Governor. We cull a few of these expressions of opinion in order to refresh Sir George Grey’s memory. -

Mr. McGlasiian, as representative of the Constitutional Association of Otago, wrote to- Earl Grey, on .February 19, 1852, as follows : ,i

They (the settlers) think that the Governor’s laudable anxiety and ambition to conduct his government with uninterrupted success have had a tendency to sway him to keep,a more tenacious grasp ;of power, and a' larger'control over the European settlers than are necessary for the time being, or are consistent with the privileges, habits, and sentiments of British subjects.

7 A' memorial to Earl Grey from the settlers of Nelson, dated February, 12, 1849, and which bears, amongst others signatures of the then foremost men of the colony, that of Mr. E. W. STAFFORD, says

Your Lordship will not impute it to fickleness or caprice that we, who so lately supported Governor Grey with our cordial co-operation and encouragement, now find hia actions arbitrary and ms measures auspicious. . . . The Legislative Council for New Munster is composed, besides official of nine persons sitting on his mere nomination, many of whom, to say the least, would never have been freely elected by us as our representatives, and by whom we scorn to be governed in any way.

The latter part of this sentence is positively refreshing when contrasted with the remarks which Sir George Grey thought fit to make respecting the Hon. Dr. Pollen. But it is from Auckland, of all other places —the province which has lately elevated Sir George Grey into the position of a demi-god—that the deepest wail of angry discontent emanated. At a monster public meeting of settlers held on July 2nd, 1849, a memorial to Earl Grey was unanimously passed, from which we make the following extracts :

But these promises, like most others of his Excellency, appear to have been made only to he broken. Your memorialists would further state that among other causes of their present want of prosperity may be instanced the very gross and wateful expenditure of the public revenue. Useless offices are created to a great extent, and money chiefly applied to worthless objects, and even when devoted to works of a class likely to forward the advancement of the colony, it is most wastefully and lavishly expended. Your memorialists allege that the Government generally, instead of being fostering and paternal according to the genius of the British Constitution, is a despotism of the worst form, Insulting to the people, and utterly regardless of their interests, and it is rendered the more intolerable because the Governor is not interested in the country, or the people over whom he rules.

The same spirit is manifested in everything. The utmost secrecy is maintained by his Excellency in every matter affecting the colony, and every attempt made to get powers, executive and legislative, centered in his own person, to be wielded in a partial and arbitrary manner, as predilection or prejudice may dictate. . . .

The reasons which Governor Grey has given for delaying this privilege your memorialists conceive to be altogether visionary and fallacious, designed mainly for the purpose of retaining the solo and absolute power in his own hands, so long as he remains hero, so that he may spend or squander the revenue of the colony as ho thinks fit. The statement made by him that the Northern settlers would not faithfully discharge their duties as members of the Legislative Council, your memorialists cannot refrain from saying was a gross and unprovoked libel upon the character of the settlers.

After remarking on the necessity ‘of publishing i» the colony all public despatches sent home by Governor Grey, the memorial goes on to say :

This proceeding is rendered necessary in conso” quence of the many instances which we discover In despatches of hia Excellency’s statements being altogether at variance with truth—sometimes false inferences, at other times false suggestions arising out of facts, true in themselves, but so artfully arranged (as to lead to erroneous conclusions, whereby the interests of the community are seriously affected.

And at a meeting of the Colonists* Association, held in Wellington on August 29, 1849, the following resolution was moved by Mr. Rhodes, and seconded by Mr. Johnston, and carried unanimously :

That, notwithstanding Sir George Grey’s professions,, this Association is convinced that he is not, and never really was favorable to representative institutions, and that his treatment of the question of their introduction to this colony has been marked by a most subtle diplomacy, and an absence of that straightforwardness which the colonists are entitled to expect from the representatives of her British Majesty-