Important Native Meeting.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume X, Issue 1036, 14 February 1882, Page 2

Important Native Meeting.

PORTER’S HALL. An important. Native meeting convened by the chief Tuta Nihoniho, was held on Saturday afternoon last, in the building known &s Porter's Hall. The principal Natives of the district were in attendance, and the subjects discussed related to local land reform. A number of Europeans were present, including many of the leading residents of the district. Tuta Nihoniho opened the proceedings by saying that the Natives should have full rights over their lands. That the mana of their territory should be within their own control. He referred fully to the questions involved in the surveying, leasing, and selling of land. He criticised severely the action of late Governments in regard to the land-pur-chasing scheme, and condemned the monopoly sought to be obtained in the past by Keeping in the hands of the Government what almost amounted to the pre-emptive right ever the lands of the Maori. Referring to the proposal made last year for rating Native lands, he said that, scheme, if carried out, was an additional reason why the Natives should have freedom of action in dealing with tleir lands. He opposed all restrictive legislation in regard to Native land matters, ami in a good speech contended warmly that the Natives had a right to perfect freedom to deal with their lands the same as the Europeans. Mr W. K. Chambers [no special interpreter being present] kindly volunteered to -interpret the proceedings, which l.is intimate knowledge of the Native language enabled him to do in a very satisfactory manner. Mr. Chambers then addressed the meeting, lie concurred in the main with the views enunciated by Tuta Nihoniho, but t here were other matters deserving of equal consideration. An Association had been recently formed for the purpose of going fully into the questions surrounding the Native lands of this district. On the 20th of this month that Association would hold a public meeting, at wnich it was requested that all persons, whet her European or Maori, should at tend. At that meeting the different phases of the question involved in the consideration of the Native Land tenure of this district would be fully discussed. The questions propounded by Tuta had already come on for discussion before the Association, and a large amount of time and attention bestowed on them. A question of paramount importance was that relating to the subdivision of Native lands. Mr Chambers went into this branch of the subject fully, an I pointed out the requisite steps to be adopted, and concluded by urging the formation of a Native Committee to co-operate with the Association.

At this stage of the proceedings Mr Gannon, who had been sent for, arrived, and was asked to interpret the proceedings, which he did. Wi Pere desired to reply to the observations that had fallen from Tuta Nihoniho. All our troubles, according to Tuta, were assignable to the defective land laws. The fault, to a certain extent, lay with both the laws nnd the Maoris. It was true that the Parliament made the laws, ami that under the hand of the Queen, or her representative, Crown Grants were issued to the Native owners. That law was established for the Maoris, and when the fee simple of the laud once became vested in the Maori owner neither t he Queen nor any one else had a right, to take it from him. The power of retaining the ownership of the land then devolved solely upon the grantees themselves. It was the “itching palm ” of the Natives, their desire h» secure money to gratify their desires that, cause the land to pass away from them. The “five fingers” became extended and were stretched out for the gold of the pakeha, and the Natives could not. withhold their hands from it. European friends of the Natives placed them on their guard, and warned them not to part recklessly with their lands, but they heeded not. Therefore, he thought, the European laws relating to land, up to a certain point, were fair to both races. The laws in themselves were right enough, but it w s the wayward and improvident character of the Maoris that caused them to abuse those laws. According to the speaker’s idea the Natives did not conform with the spirit, of the laws under which the titles were investigate! to land under the Native Land Act, 1873, under the Act of 1367, nor with lands giant.? 1 to the Natives by the Crown. Referring to the Native Land Act, 18/3, a provision was inserted in that Act which according Io his rea 1ing meant that Natives were not io dispose by way of sale those lands without the uninimous consent of the owners being al o.:t> tlm? obtained. He was nut a lawyer, b<t that w.is his interpretation of the Act. but what did they find ? Naiives did not a.lucre t ; t hat principle of the law. They came singly an I at. irregular intervals, and one by one they sold their land. He believed sure a system was nut right. On the cuntrury, the w.i »ie of the Native owners shoul I at the one time sanction the sale. If the Govermn?nt. would

cause a meeting of all the Ma »ri c >iefs fron the different parts of New Zealand to be hel I a Native Land Law coul 1 be devised t’l.i would be mutually advantageous to all <•! isse of the community. According to ol 1 Ma »r custom it wafl their elders who possessed th<

controlling power in regard to land matters. 1 It was the representative men such as chiefs, and heads of families who bore the sway ; it was with them the power laid. Not so now. The European comes upon the scene. European laws are ma le, and the power of the chiefs of the Maori people arc slowly but surely wiped away, Thus was it. at the present time. The power <-f the chief was nnl-lifi.-d. Under the exiting laws a Maori chief or elder c vii.i not prot.Tt the land of his p.?o;)ls. If the whole of the lands remained with the Native title unexlinguished. then the child’s could retain some semblance of power, but almost the whole of the land in this district has had its title adjudicated upon. Tuta in many respects was right in what he stated, ic.it unfortunately under the sytem of giving single Crown grants Io the Natives deploral.de consequences to Ihe Maori would ensue. The most beneficial law passed by the Queen was that which scrured the land from sale, rendering it inalienable. The system of the Government purchasing land was vicious in the extreme. The Government had don-* great injustice to the Maoris in buying lands from them at a nominal stun, but first exrlu'ling the private? purchaser from the field. The law that hands the land, over to the young people as well as the obi was equally bad. Was it to he supposed that the young people could look after it as well ns th-ir seniors. The way the Government had gone to work impoverished the Natives. There was nothing unreasonable so far as private parties purchasing from Natives was concerned. One party had the money and the other the land, and the sale depended upon satisfactory terms between buyer and seller being arrived at. The action of the Government precluded al! competition. The land had to be sold to them or the Maories could not sell it at all ; nor could they by their own exertions improve it. The diiii.-uities surrounding the subdivision of the lands were great indeed. Mr Chambers was (|uite right in saying that the lands should be subdivided. But the land should not be apportioned off in such a manner that each individi.il Native could have uncontrolled power ovor his particular piece of land, it would be a dark day for the Natives when the time came that such a condition of things would eventuate. It would be for the Committee to go into the question. They possibly would be enabled to devise soim? scheme whereby the difficulty of subdividing and awarding the land to individuals could be overcome. He would like Io hear an expression of opinion from the Europeans on the subject. He was opposed to having the lands encumbered in consequence of any subdivisional surreys. In reply to tin enquiry from Mr Matthews, Wi Pere stated that when he said that the only law that was considerate in its character for the Natives, was the one providing for the land being kept inalienable, and that all the lands should be kept tied up, he (Wi Pere) meant by that that only sufficient land for the maintenance of the Nat ives should be rendered inalienable. Such portions as the Natives did uot require they should dispose of on fair terms.

Tuta Nihoniho : It was not tho law that brought ruin on the Natives ; it was the Natives themselves. He did not claim to be thoroughly versed in these matters, being a young person. The Government were neverilie less to blame. If a child were to walkout into the water, while the parent was looking on, and it so happened that tl.e child got drowned who should bo blamed ? The child or the parents. IL; (Tuta Nihoniho) would blame the parent. In like manner he would blame the Government who stretched not out a ht’ljjing hand to tho Maori people in a time when t!n-y so much were in need of assistance. Wi Pure on the other hand, blamed the Government and not tlu? private persons, lie (Tuta) ant icijiated that another meeting would be held, the present one being of a preliminary character. For his own part he was glad the meeting hud taken place. He and his people who would be shortly return-

ing down the coast, were anxious to know what, steps the Europeans and Maoris were about Io lake in carrying out the great work of land reform in this district. Possibly some of the Europeans present might wish to address the meeting.

Mr Matthews would take the opportunity of saving a few words. As the Natives were already aware, an Association of Europeans hud been formed for carrying out such a scheme as would tend to a belter law for dealing with the subdivision of Native lauds, and other kindred matters. It would be wise for a committee of Natives to be formed to-

uo-operate with the Europeans in the important work taken in hand. The interests of the two races upon this point were identical. The advantage accruing to both races by the adoption of wise legislation would bo of a mutual character. The Natives would be placed in a belter position to realise the fair value of their laud. As the law stood a European purchasing land from Natives was compelled, after estimating the fair value of the land, to make a deduction of 25 per cent, or perhaps more in order to meet the other expenses he would be put to over and above the value of the land. That loss to the Natives wss owing to the cumbersome nature of the present Lind laws. There was no desire on the part, of Europeans to act unfairly to the Natives when buying their land al, what appeared to the sellers a low price, because tiiere were many other expenses to be met bj' the European, such as the cost of negotiation, &c., which the vendors did not. take into consideration. By simplifying the Native Land Acts, and facilitating the buying and selling of land much more competition would present itself ami the Natives would get a higher price fur their land. At present intending purchasers were frightened away. Referring to the question of subdivision, Mr Matthews pointed out very lucidly the drawbacks that, were oeeasiiHied under that head. There were other matters the Association proposed to tai * in hand, such as relate I to the Harbor V/orks, and many other subjects in which tho co-operation of the Natives of this district- would be productive of good fur themselves and the Europeans. The Association thought it was wise that ample reserves should be kept for the Natives. There was nothing political in the organization. After some further discussion the meeting terminated.