MR. JOHN LUNDON’S NATIVE POLICY ADOPTED.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5457, 23 September 1878, Page 2

MR. JOHN LUNDON’S NATIVE POLICY ADOPTED.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE NEW ZEALAND .TIMES. Sin, —The Ministry received a blow last Friday night that has weakened its stability more than at first sight may appear. When the Native Minister proposed to grant a freehold franchise to the Maoris, iu his speeolionuativeaffiiirs, we venture to assert that not one iu ten of his hearers ever dreamt that he intended to confer a new very important extra privilege of voting upon the Maori race; nevertheless this has been done in - committee on the Electoral Bill. The clause as amended reads ns follows :—“Every male Maori of twenty-one years of age shall subject to the provisions of this Act, be qualified to vote in the election of members for the House of HepreSentatives, but shall only be so qualified if (a) he is seized at law or in equity of lauds or tenements for his own life or for the life of any other person, or for any larger estate of the clear value of £25 at the least, and has been seized for six mouths previous to the date of his claim to vote, or if (6) his name is enrolled on a ratepayers’ roll iu force within the district for which ho claims to vote, on account of lands or tenements belonging to him, and shall have actually paid his rates for the year in which his claim to vote is made." The interpretation of. the sub-sectioii (a) is that all Maoris holding laud, whether in common or not, have a power of voting at any election of European members in addition to their own special power of voting for their own Maori members. ‘ The injustice of this proposal is apparent, if it is borne in mind that the land which is assumed to give them a right to vote is not liable to be rated and cannot be seized or sold for debt, f.e, it is made to confer the power of voting, but neither pays its taxes nor is subject to the responsibilities of laud held by Europeans. Mr. Fox pointed out the anomaly very clearly, and Mr. Bryce, while he owned that ho could have supported the Bill iu its original form, declined to submit to a radical innovation of principle which unduly favored the Maori race at the expense of the European. The division of 43 to 36 by which room was made for the alteration shows the temper of the House. Your report says —“ The committee divided on the amendment proposed by SJr Itobert Douglas, to the effect that every male person (Euro-, pean or Maori) should be liable to he sued for rates in respect of the property on which he claimed the right to vote. The numbers being equal, the Chairman gaye his casting vote with the noes, considering that the question of the property of Maoris being liable for votes ought not to be mixed up with that, of their right to vote.” Tho effect of tUeso two divisions is this; Every Maori who

owns tribal land in common, exempt from all the usual rates and responsibilities of property, and with no individualization of title, has a right to vote both for Maori members and for any European member within any electoral district where such tribal property exists. The Maori vote, in scores of cases, will in future be as important an item in elections in the North Island as the Irish vote in New York. Throw out; the four Maori members in the consideration of this question, whose vote was certainly biassed; and has no right to influence our judgment, then it is clear that this unfair privilege would not have been carried in its unjust form. At last the Maoris have a right to exercise the virtual control over many elections which do not affect them personally. Maori members’ votes have turned a scale in their own, favor, when the question of measuring out justice was being debated between European parties. Tho plaintiffs under trial were allowed to vote with the jury, and their vote carried the verdict of the majority. Having made this point clear, let it be understood that probably three-fourths of the House was prepared to allow tho Maori race to have its full quota of special representation, i.e. t eight members. The proposal in the eaily part of the debate to alter the residential qualification to six mouths split the Ministry and was lost. This last innovation giving Maoris, besides their own special representation, the power of influencing European elections was not attempted to be defended by its proposer, Mr. Sheehan, on the score of justice—simply of expediency. No doubt it is very expedient to do so in the case of a party who accept insults from native chiefs as though they were concessions, and are styled and. welcomed as Maoris by the race ; forgetful, perhaps, that tho term implies that they are recognised by the Maoris as renegades to European principles of civilisation and equality in the eye of the law. Mr. Brandon quoted a case where trespassers upon land granted by the Crown to the owner were not evicted.or prosecuted because the , Queen’s writ was not served from motives of expediency only. Of course this was native difficulties as usual.— I am, &c., * Y.