THE WAR IN NEW ZEALAND.

Southland Times, Volume III, Issue 22, 28 December 1863, Page 5 (Supplement)

THE WAR IN NEW ZEALAND.

Tt ir quite refreshing to find so discriminating and statesmanlike a review of a colonial question in a colonial paper * r*» the "article on theOSTew Zealand war which we publish from, the Sydney Morning Herald. Party spirit runs so ..high in most colonies, and material interests occupy so disproportionate a space in their politics, as to obscure many of those considerations which geem paramount in importance to an . educated Englishman. The consequence. \ff is that we rarely, get .an opinion on colonial subjects which is at the same; time comprehensive and practical. Prejudice and local jealousies narrow the i views of those who have most knowledge, ignorance of detail vitiates the enlightened theories of those who are free from partiality. Here, however, we have a good specimen of the spirit in which colonial difficulties might be handled if the two sets of qualifications were more frequently united. Inflexible justice and a determination neither to do nor to suffer wrong are the most potent means of moral influence all the world over; and this treatment differs from the policy which has been adopted towards the Maories as the firm touch of a hospital sura-eon ■differs from the cruel tenderness of a nervous friend. Even Sir G. Grey, in his conferences with the chiefs of powerful tribes, has sometimes committed to negotiate where ie should have been his sole object to ascertain fights and enforce them. The consequence of such a system, founded as it was on a scrupulous regard for the peculiarities of Maori character, ha 9 •been, in some respects, disastrous. The ■natives have got less than justice in a few instances, and this has been their ■excuse for demanding more than justice in many others, and taking the law into their own hands in all. This, it is to be feared, is the course which 'the most powerful Maori tribes have 'deliberately chosen, and we agree with «ttr Sydney contemporary that " their •choice is fatal." Fatal it must be to themselves, as a people, for the issue which they have raised is such that the war cannot leave them where it faund them. Presuming on their virtual exemption from *' the salutary restraints of equal laws/ they have commenced a series of murders, which cannot be punished judicially, and which, coupled with their threats of driving fcfee English into the *ea, commit them to the purpose of exterminating the colonists, if they can. It is time, therefore, to consider whether the English or the Maories are to be masters of New Zealand. Unless we •are prepared to carry the doctrine of nalionalities to a pitch of extravagance beyond the wildest flights of its expositors, we cannot regard this as an ■open question. We employed neither force nor fraud in our original colonisation of New Zealand. We acquired our present position (here by treaty and have abstained from cancelling that treaty, when it would have been v -venial to do so. We Lave treated the natives fiom the first as equals, aud have ouly erred, on the side of weakness, in not subjecting them to the same obligatioas as British subjects, which in theory they were. We have neither taxed them unduly, nor imposed any oppressive disabilities ■upon them, nor left them any grievance to complain of which would justify an insurrection in a civilised -nation. We tolerated a movement among them which had«no other object than to show disloyalty to the Sovereign whom nevertheless they acknowledged, because we would not precipitate a rupture which might become an internecine war between the two races. Beyond this we ■cannot go in concessions. If the clerical Advisers of the Maories cannot induce them to repent of their resolution, they must be delivered over to the secular •arm. We cannot, for the sake of our ■own honor and conscience, make reprisals in kind upon these war-Christians, who tomahawk unarmed men working quietly in the fields, but such retribution as is consistent with humanity it is our duty for the sake of the white inhabitants of New Zealand, to inflict. The warning of Sir G. Grey to the insurgents must be followed up by the forfeiture of their lands. No one can read the address of the Governor to the New Zealand Parliament, delivered last year, without giving him credit for a wish to avoid this necessity, But a necessity it is, if we are to have any peace for the future in those islands. So long as a body of unscrupulous chiefs C3n assemble a war party and can make raids on their European neighbors without any risk excepting to their own lives, there will be no end to bloodshed. Hitherto the aggressors have practically enjoyed all the benefits of their treachery and ferocity as soon as peace was patched up, and. nave not been required to make restitution. The assurance of impunity must now be taken from them. They -must be made to know that the treaty of Waitangi implies reciprocal obligations, and will be maintained' only so far as they fulfil the conditions of it. It would be neither just nor politic to confiscate the whole of the native territory, but the wooded region which lies close to Auckland, and enables the rebellious Waikatos to menace the seat of Government as they have lately done must be occupied, on a military tenure, by those who will know how to protect themselves and others. It is not mainly because in this way the war may be made, as it ought to pay for '■ itself, that the measure is to be justified, but because, while it is essential to the security of Auckland, it will teach the Maories a lesson which they will thoroughly appreciate. The exagerated value which they attach to the rights of property may thus become a guarantee for tranquility instead of the source .of incessant disturbances in New Zealand.