THE NEW ZEALAND REMONSTRANCE.

Southland Times, Volume I, Issue 48, 24 April 1863, Page 5 (Supplement)

THE NEW ZEALAND REMONSTRANCE.

(From the Saturday licvieto, January 23.)

English Governments have generally made a point of reserving to themselves the government of the native races who have settlements within the borders of English colonies. Their efforts to do so have been the result of a philanthropic solicitude which seemed amply justified by facts. The natives were weak and the colonists were strong : and the natives were the exclusive proprietors of the one great commodity which the colonists emigrated to obtain. That the rights of landed property would be little regarded in the intercourse of the two races was a presumption fully justified by the experience of other countries. English ministers, therefore, in most of the colonies, and in New Zealand especially, have clung to the exclusive control of native affairs with singular tenacity, in spite of the loud protests of many political philosophers. But in New Zealand, at all events, after a time, when a Constitution had been conceded to the colony, it became apparent that theloeal government of the whites, and the Imperial government of the colored race, could uot go on side by side. The subject-matter of each jurisdiction could not be divided from that of the other by any very definite line : and cases constantly arose in which either the two authorities must clash, or orie must accept the dictation of the other. Taught by a costly experience, England has seceded from her old claims and is now desirous of parting with her native jurisdiction. But she finds herself very much in the same condition as the celebrated Russian who reported that he had caught a Tartar. For many years she has struggled to reta n her jurisdiction, in spite of the logic of theoretic politicians and the importunity of colonial patriots. But now that she finds she can afford to keep it no longer, and has made up her ;i;ind to abandon it, she discovers that it will not leave her. The colonists are no longer willing to take it off her hands. They, too, have found out that the honor of governing the Maories costs money, and they are too thrifty to desire so expensive a mark of confidence. England has committed the common feminine error of refusing her suitor once too often. But a short time ago, New Zealand was importunate, while England was coy and chill. Now the tables are entirely turned. England is very willing to be kind, but New Zealand has become cold and prudent.

The New Zealand Asseznbly has more to say in its own behalf than may at once occur to those who have only looked at the surface of the case. At first sight it seems quite intolerable that the tea, and sugar, and tobacco of the Dorsetshire laborer should be taxed to protect the homesteads of the well-to-do farmer in New Zealand, while the New Zealand farmer does not pay a single farthing of taxes for the benefit of the Dorsetshire laborer. If the matter were res Integra, this statement of the case would be unanswerable. In the present state of knowledge and opinion, no English Government would pledge its taxpayers to the expensive duty of subduing the Maori tribes for the benefit of the New Zealand colonists. But the strength of the New Zealand case lies in the fact that we do not begin at the beginning. There is a past which cannot be effaced. There is a Colonel Browne whose deeds cannot be blotted out. There are pledges which we must redeem, and blunders for wkich we must pay the penalty. The colonists have two lines of argument to fall back upon. They may say, in the first place, that they emigrated

upon the understanding that England would bear a part in their defence ; and that England has no right, at a moment's notice, to reverse the policy upon the strength of which they abandoned their homes, and renounced the chance of a subsistence in England. But if she is resolved to disregard this honorable understanding, and dissolve the partnership, she is at least bound not to leave the affairs of the firm in absolute confusion j especially when they have been reduced to that condition through her mismanagement. Under the Imperial rule the natives have been goaded into an animosity against the white settlers which is very far from having been allayed as yet. Probably the feeling between the two races is, at this moment, more bitter than it has been at any previous time since the existence of the colony began. Such a moment is not one which England ou^ht to select for the purpose of committing native affairs to local management. It may be just that the settlers should be called upon to defend themselves against the ordinary risks which arise from the neighborhood of savage tribes, but it is not just that. England should first exasperate the natives against the settlers, and then leave the settlers to repel the natives as best they can.

Such is the gist of the remonstrance which, the Lower House at Auckland has presented to the Queen. The argument has a technical validity ; but no men know better than the members of the New Zealand parliament how ltttie real truth lies beneath its outward plausibility. Legally, it is no doubt true that the series ot blunders by which the late war, and all the confusion consequent on it, were brought about, were the act of the Imperial Government, through its deputy. Governor Browne is the only person responsible for that lawless disregard of the proprietary rights of the natives which has provoked and terrified them into si desperate resistance. The bargain with Teira, the secret trial in the land agent's office, the forcible seizure of the disputed property by a detachment o troops, were his act, and his alone. But it is only in a technical sense that the responsibility for these proceedings lies with the British Government. They were adopted under colonial pressure and for the furtherance of colonial aims. The vehement cry on the part of the settlers at Taranaki for more l a nd was the governor's avowed motive in seeking to effect the purchase which led to such deplorable results. After he- had taken the first steps, be was urged to proceed further by the strenuous approbation of his colonial Ministry, distinctly recorded in a special minute. Ifc is no excuse for him that he exercised under popular pressure an authority which bad been confided to him for the very purpose of rescuing it from local influence. But it is rather sharp practice on the part of the colonists to take advantage of the fact that, in listening to their importunity, the Governor forgot his duty. They pray for vigorous measures ; vigorous measures are adopted, and the result is war ; and then they turn round and say that the war is the fault of the Imperial representative who listened to their prayers. It is no doubt true that the original error Jay far deeper than tbe faults either of colonists or government. The attempt to govern a country containing* a large native population upon constitutional principles was an absurdity in itself. An island in which peace and order could ouly be maintained by a large military force was in effect a military dependency ; and could only be held, if it was to be held at all, upon military principles. But a mistake of this kind, Once rrade, cannot be repaired. It is not for those who worried England into granting a Constitution to fix upon her tbe responsibility for tbe fatal consequences which they have continued to draw from her unwise liberality.

Other portions of the Remonstrance deserve the serious consideration of the authorities at home. The regulation underwhich an incompetent commander cannot be changed without a reference to an authority sixteen thousand miles away, is a very characteristic piece of Horse Gviards' pedantry. It scarcely requires serious argument to prove that a governor who is charged to suppress a rebellion must have the absolute disposal of the military force, and must not be bound to employ officers whom he distrusts. The other rrcommendation which is made by the House of Representatives may be more difficult to carry out. ,The conduct of the militia and volunteers of Taranaki in defending their homes may have been very meritorious ; but there hardly seems any ground for devising a special order of merit as a recognition of their services. In their case virtue has been eminently its own reward. The fact that their property has been recovered or preserved, and that they themselves have not been eaten, should console them for the ignorance which has blinded the authorities in London to the brilliancy of their feats of arms. We believe that the consolation will be sufficient. We cannot share in the fears expressed by the New Zealand House of Commons that when next a Maori chief attacks the homesteads of the coloniats, it will be impossible to persuade them to defend themselves, unless a mental vision of clasps and ribbons shall beguile them into a temporary courage. We have no fear that when the alternative is presented to him of shooting or being shot, an Englishman will always elect to shoot. At all events, it is clear that those whose dislike of fighting is so strong that it can only be overcome by their taste for decorations, are out of place in an island which contains some fifteen thousand warlike natives in its centre.