THE STANDARD. SATURDAY, MARCH 15, 1873.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume I, Issue 35, 15 March 1873, Page 2

THE STANDARD.

SATURDAY, MARCH 15, 1873.

“We shall sell to no man justice or right: We shall deny to no man justice or right: We shall defer to no man justice or right.”

The Native Lands Alienation Commission, sitting in Napier, will leave its mark on the pages of this colony’s history; and if it does no other good, it will put the saddles on the right horsey. That there have been many frivolous complaints made, we can see plainly; and it is devoutly to be wished that the framers of the paltry excuses for investigation which have come before the Judges, will be mulcted in the expenses they have put the country to. Much more good than that, however, must result to the Native race. It will expose the existence of immorality in certain spheres of trade, which custom, and the pecuniary necessities, of the Maoris, winked at, if they did not sanction. The outcome of its proceedings should

act as an incentive for allowing the

I principle of freejrade in land, between Europeans and**Maoris, to find its own level, and to work out its own ends, trusting entirely and solely to its own merits and integrity. It will be the means of establishing a confidence between both buyer and seller, and uproot a system of grasping propensity for the acquisition of land at the sacrifice, sometimes, of personal honor ; it will prove to the Natives that if they have been wronged they shall also have redress, —for it must not be forgotten that, according to the petition sent up to Parliament last session signed by Renata. Kawepo and 533 other Natives, they claimed this Enquiry “ under the plea that they have been “ swindled ” —and it will be a warning to those who have been foolishly lavish with the proceeds of the sale of their birthright; but above all it will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, we hope with a crushiiig condemnation on the one hand, and clear, from the accusations of an unjust calumny, those who, -On the other, are embroiled in looks very much like a conspiracy. *We have a notable instance of what may be stated,’, by an unscrupulous client to his lawyer, in the “ instructions” given by Kabaitiana to Mr. Sheehan in Re the celebrated Heretaunga Block. In the Hawke's Bay Herald of the 7th inst., Mr. Sheehan is reported to have said in his opening address,

“ Tn the Heretuanga case—as well as in one or two others which would come before the Commission—- he would say (and he did not think he would be doing his duty were he not to do so) that the action of men of high standing and position, not only in Hawke’s Bay, but also in the colony, while dealing with natives for land, was exceedingly discreditable. As he had been instructed, too, Mr. Ormond, Superintendent of Hawke’s Bay, a member of the General Assembly, and General Government agent, had taken advantage of his high official position to induce the natives to sell Heretaunga, or, if not that particular block, at any rate to sell land.” Mr.. Sheehan however, retracted the statement at the end of the sitting, as he found he had been wrongly “instructed.” But there is a strong suspicion abroad, with regard to these transactions that the hands of others are not quite so clean; and the utmost value that can be placed on Mr. Sheehan’s retractation, is, that it was rather the withdrawal of an offensive form of expression which was not capable of direct proof against a public officer, than the assertion of Mr. Ormond’s innocence as a private individual

Mr. Sheehan has rendered good service in this, for he has raised a question which no doubt the Commissioners will take a note of in their Report to Parliament. “As a stranger to the “ district he asked how it was that “ Hawke’s Bay should be singled out “ as the only place in the Colony where “ there had been a general rising of the “ original grantees, in order to become “ re-possessed of their lands ?” And he shows himself to be acquainted with, at least, half the truth, for he supplied an answer, in part, in discovering the ledger influence which had been at work in operating on some of the grantees. “ Ref ering to the consideration given by the purchasers to the different grantees on account of Heretaunga, he mentioned the amount alleged to have been received, and amongst others mentioned Rata te Honi as being the sole grantee who had received his full consideration in cash, a fact which Mr. Sheehan attributed to the providential circumstance that he did not reside in the Province of Hawke’s Bay.” The other half of the truth Mr. Sheehan can hardly be ignorant of. Kabattiana wanted money and pawned his gig. He wanted £4O more or less, from any source, —public funds or private purse, it mattered not—to redeem it; and, in fact, as the price of his support to Mr. McLean in the House. Failing in this he joined hands with the side on which Mr. ShkEhan’s sympathies are enlisted; and has attempted ever since, to make as much as of a political matter of it as he could, even to the extent of private malignity. But Mr. Sheehan knows this as well as we do, and, in effect, has apologised for the dishonesty of his client.