THE COLONIST. NELSON, TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1860.

Colonist, Volume III, Issue 304, 18 September 1860, Page 2

THE COLONIST. NELSON, TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1860.

Papers relative to Native Affairs, July, 1860. Governor's despatch, 14th October, 1858; referring to Mr. Richmond's (Native Commissioner) memorandum. In par. 5 he quotes from the memorandum the following passage, viz., it is asserted that' the native is really tsjalfyed to an absolute grant in fee simple of whatever territories his tribe may think fit to make over to him (in severally), however extensive; and that to refuse such a grant, at least to impose any condition which does not operate for the sole and exclusive benefit of the natives is unfair.' In reply to which his Excellency observes —* If by these expressions it is intended to invalidate the rights of the aboriginal natives to their unoccupied lands, the subject is one which involves the peace of the whole Colony, the rights of the natives secured to them by the Treaty of Waitangi, and the fulfilment of engagements made by successive Governors and confirmed by successive Secretaries of State.'

We confess we cannot see the force or the correctness of his Excellency's remarks. If the native to whom his tribe may think fit to apportion him off any portion of the lands belonging to them, and he, the grantee, should wish to put himself and his property under the laws of the white people, which his accepting a Crown grant would in fact place him, we do not see how that/ad need involve the whole colony in all the consequences enumerated by his Excellency, unless he admits thevalidity ofthe tribal rights. He however goes on to say—• In refutation of these arguments I might content myself with quoting the evidence of Mr. Merivale before the committee of the House of Commons (1857), wherein he states the native title to land in New Zealand is very peculiar: by the interpretation put upon the Treaty of Waitangi by the Home Government it was considered that the New Zealand tribes had a proprietorship like landlords of estates, for which the Crown was bound to pay them.' The above statement his * Excellency considers conclusive. Conclusive of what he does not inform us.

As we purpose to confine our remarks solely to the native territorial rights, we pass over Archdeacon Kissling's letter 10 his Excellency, and proceed to Mr. Richmond's memorandum; and, for reasons given above, proceed to section. No. 5, wherein he says the Native Territorial Rights Bill affects the most difficult and delicate question with which the British Government has to deal, and the Legislature in touching on it has shown a corresponding caution (cl. 18.) The Bill, he says, has two aspects (objects in view): one the civilisation of the Maoris; the other the promotion of the settlement of the country by Europeans. The two being thought inseparable. But it does not contemplate facilitating the present means for the acquisition of land by the Europeans (Government ?) cl. 19 Clauses 20 to 25 inclusive commence with admission that since the formation of the colony there- have been four feuds, all having reference to the disputed title to land, and others are at this moment smoiddering (2858), and that the communistic habits of the natives are the chief bar to their advancement, and consequently separate landed holdings are indispensable to their further progress. And •in order to strike at the root of these evils it is necessary to provide—first, for the ascertainment and registry of thibal title ; secondly, for the issue of Crown grants to individual natives of lands ceded for the purpoee [what purpose ?] by their respective tribes. The propriety of making at least an attempt to provide means for the " extrication of native title from its present entanglement, &c, can hardly admit of a doubt.' Granted. The only wonder is that, with the experience before it lor these twenty years last past, the Government should never have thought of some such proposition long ago. However, the ministers are desirous of making ca timely step in advance as being not only [the safest but the justest course,"as the surest means to avoid future complications.' He then says: This is a case in which it will be found that a ' froward retention of custom is as turbulent a thing as innovation.' Clause *25 strengthens our observation above tenfold.

25. Although the measure was not framed with any direct view to colonizing objects, it cannot be doubted that the proposed Registration of Native Title (too long neglected), would facilitate the operations of the Land Purchase Department, and the acquisition, by cession from the Tribes, of fresh .territory. At present there are no fixed rules whatever as to what shall be recognised as valid claims to share in the money paid for the surrender of the Native right. Absurd arid vexatious disputes constantly, attend the negotiations of the Department,, and are only settled by a large expenditure of Colonial Funds.

We now pass to the memorandum by the Bishop of New Zealand, in which he considers that the native question divides itself into the following five points. As however we purposely confine our remarks to the fourth and fifth, we proceed at once to them.. -;■■■■

I. As regards the actual occupation o land by the natives themselves. His lordship observes • The native land title is simple enough in its origin but from obvious causes extremely complicated in its actual state. In its theory it is this: a few leading chiefs with a small body of children and retainers, arrive at different parts of theHsland, and make a rough partition of the; territory among themselves by natural boundaries of mountains and rivers. These families grow into tribes; each possessing the patrimony derived from its ancestors. To preserve this inheritance unimpaired was a primary object of their care. To this end two restrictions were necessary :—■ Ist, Upon the right of alienation, and 2ndly, Upon the liberty of marriage The case of the daughters^ Zelophehad ii strictly analogous to Maori usage. * < Other reasons may be assigned for these restrictions, such as .

Ist, The right of the tribe to require service from all its members,

3nd, The necessity of keeping up their own number, and

3rd, The necessity of preventing strangers from acquiring landed property to be used to the injury of the tribe. To all and each of the foregoing observations and deductions we think nobody can advance any thing to shake the coni-. mon sense view here taken. He then goes on to say * There is reason to think that an independent (that is to say, an isolated individual) right to alienate land without the consent of the tribe is unknown in New Zealand. He then observes—Three points then seem to be clear on this subject :—

1. That there was originally a distinct owner' for every habitable spot in the Northern Island. 2. That these claims have become complicated by the obvious causes of inheritance and marriage, without forms of conveyance or bequest. m , 3. That these rights of ownership, whether in "one or many joints proprietors, were not alienable without the consent of the tribe.

It will readily be admitted that this state of the Native Land Title'is neither beneficial to the Native owner nor favourable to the acquisition of land for the English colonist. It is not favourable to the Nativo owners for the following reasons :— Because the undisturbed possession of one acre is of more value than the nominal ownership of an hundred acres. '

Because the complication of claims ia the fruitful source of discoidsamong themselves. Because the claim ,to widely-scattered estates distracts their attention from their religious duties, separates them from their pastors, and prevents improvement in their domestic and social habits, Because the number of joint proprietors prevents the disposition of property by will or assignment, and makes it probable that, by the decrease of the Native race, large tracts of land may be nominally in the possession of a very few owners, and therefore an object of envy and ill will to the English settler*, in a continually increasing degree. And it is unfavourable to the acquisition of land for the English colonists, because of the necessity which it involves of obtaining the consent of a large number of owners. , .

The results of these inconveniences are :— ' A growing irritation between the two races. A greater tenacity of land in tho Native owners. A re-kindling of Native wars upon old land questions. . ,

And a schism among the English colonists, between those who support the Native rights and those, who advocate, as they think, the interests of the Colony.

Nobody who reads the foregoing masterly review of the Native Land Title without being convinced that not only much igno-! ranee has prevailed upon the subject on. the part not only of the great body of European settlers, but on the part of those whose special duty it was to make themselves masters of the subject upon a right understanding of which all the best interests of the natives and settlers so vitally depended; and perhaps there never was another instance in the whole range of British Colonial Dependencies where such a lamentable ne-| gleet of its first and paramount duties was, ever displayed by its delegates as in the case of these islands.

He then proceeds to consider the remedies best suited to correct the present state of things, which for the present we shall pass over, and pass on to the memorandum of W. Martin, Esq., late Chief Justicejof New Zealand; and, pursuing the same rule regarding this as the preceding memoranda, direct our attention solely to the question-^----the Native Land Title. He observes, the practical problem which Is to be solved in respect to the native race comprises two operations, namely, Ist, to obtain from the natives by fair and peaceful means a transfer of their superfluous lands; secondly, to establish the natives upon the residue in orderly communities obedient to law. Here we think the learned gentleman has put the cart before the horse. How will he define what are superfluous lands before, i he has established the natives into orderly communities upon territorial divisions of land for their inheritance?, However, let that pass. He observes, and observes truly, that, up to this period of time, the policy of the Government has been founded on

one principle, namely,_ of reorganising the chiefs of the native tribes, and acting through tKem; and the Treaty of Waitangi, in the Maori text, expressly guarantees to the chiefs their full rights of chieftships. The English form (the original draft of the treaty) was less explicit on the point. This is a curious fact, and as each party may stickle for its own interpretation is of itself sufficient to account for much if not all the subsequent misunderstandings that have arisen between the two races and between the missionaries and the Government. He then goes on to observe— .

At this present time, the special difficulties which are connected with the Native question are, first, i diminished willingness on the part of many of the Natives to pait with their lands; and, secondly, » desire on the part of many amongst them to set up som* sort of internal organization for themselves, more or less independent of us. This latter teridancy is sometimes spoken of as the " Maori King Movement," be- ; cause one section of the Waikato tribe adopted that*, title for their old Chief Tewherowhero, or (as heisnow more commonly called) Potatau. He himeelf has uniformly refused any title but tha£ of Mjatua (Father). Some vjolent men iv the Waikato district may have, desired to carry this Ttia'oriorganiEatiOn to the length' of actual independence of the Queen; but .I believe such persons to have been and to be even now few in > number, though the excitement of the present war may naturally increase their number; the strong good sense of the people at large shews them thut such a state of tilings is.neitherpracticable nor d'eiirable. From this it will be seen that a very unfair

and indeed unwarrantable* construction has been designedly put ujjon' what is called the ' Maori King movement; * the only real object of which was to make a stand against what the natives considered to be the alienation of their territorial possessions; and we mast say, taking his Excelleucy's despatch at the head of the printed papers marked E, No. 1, that he does not feel so strongly upon this point as some of his advisers would wish him to do. There is one expression of his Excellency, in his prefatory remarks which it is difficult to see the-real intent and meaning of. He says; —♦ The memorandum is a very able production, setting forth the views of my responsible advisers, grouping them shiU fully, and placing them in the most favorable, point of view. 1 The* term skilfully would bear the meaning of artfully, dexterously, intimating thereby that the author would seem to be seeking to make the worse appear the better reason. However, as we are not among his Excellency's /legal advisers, nor called upon to render his enigmatical terms into plain English, we shall leave our readers each to draw his own conclusions upon them. * . In our next we shall follow up the subject.

Volunteers advance! We have the greatest pleasure in placing the fallowing letter before our readers,, especially that portion of them that delight in matters military. There are two reasons for this. The first is, that it shows that the services of the volunteers and'militia are not poohpoohed by the military authorities; and the second is, that it offers a splendid opportunity to many of the volunteers in Nelson to vie with their brave brethren in arms of ( Australia, and likewise to put into practice what apparently so many of them are so eager to engage in. feome letters have lately appeared in the papers on the subj ject; we shall now be able to judge whether the bayonet or the pen is the favorite weapon of the writers of these epistles. Again we say, Volunteers advance I Colonial Secetary's Office, Auckland, 31 August, iB6O. Sir—Major-General Pratt having intimated to the Government that a number of the Kelson settlers were desirous of being attached to the Taranalri Volunteers, I have the honor to request that you will ascertain and report to the Government here whether any number of unmarried men at Nelson will volunteer for service at Taranaki on the same terms as those which the Taranaki Volunteers are engaged, namely, to receive one suit of clothing; pay, at the rate of one shilling and ninepence per diem (in-1 eluding allowances), and rations, which comprise fuel and light, and on the further conditions that passages to and from Taranaki are provided for them. ,

They would require to be enrolled for this service, for atleast three months.

. I have to request that is early a reply as possible may be furnished with a view to such steps a 8 may be required in this matter being promptly taken. Ihave&c., E. Wi STAFFORD. The Officer Commanding the Nelson Militia and Volunteers, Nelson...

Fearful Accident.—A young man named Grant, who recently arrived here by the Anne Longton, met with an accident, which providentially did not at once end fatally. »He wassliingling on the premises of Messrs;- Nash and Scaife, Bridge-street, when he fell froriilhe roof. He was promptly taken to the hospital, and immediately attended to. It was discovered he had experienced a fearful scalp wound, described similar to that caused by the first stroke of the knife of a butcher,-when skinning a sheep. At presenttheft is every hope that he will recover, unless inflammatory symptons supervene.

Major Richmond, C.B.—lt affords us much pleasure to find that among those whom her Majesty has pleased to honor, this old and zealous servant of New Zealand has not been overlooked. By the London Gazette of the 18th, of May we learn that" The Queen has been graciously pleased togive orders for the appointment of Major Matthew Richmond to be a Companion of the Most Honorable Order of the Bath."— New Zealander, Septembers.

Drunkenness.—We copy the following from the volume of Government Statistics, the principal contents of which we gave in a back numbersAuckland Province . i- .626 New Plymouth . ; ;v- . 27 , Wellington (including Wanganui) 352 Napier . . . . . . 5 Nelson . . ... . 69 Canterbury . ... . 379 Otago . . . . . .158 Total convictions for drunkenness throughout New Zealand, 1859 1516 Kesident Magistrate's Court.—Yesterday, George Bell, cook of the Gazelle, was brought up for an assault on the mate. He was placed in durance for forty-eight hours for being drunk and disorderly. The prisoner was principal witness in the atrocious case of the Strakers of the Snaresbrook at Wellington, whose brutal conduct must still be fresh in the memory of our readers.

Rifles at Last,—lt wil}-cheer the hearts of oar gallant volunteers in towh and country to hear that there is at last a chance of their being relieved from the monotony of playing 'dummy.' The following is an extract from a private letter from the Colonel to the Adjutant of the Nelson forces: —"3500 rifles are daily expected, 'and Nelson will have her share of them.":

The Town Clock.—lt will be seen by an advertisement in this day's paper that a^meeting will take place at the Court House, on Thursday evening next, to take into-consideration the state of our daily monitor whose irregularities of late have seriously annoyed all time keeping persons. Whether the meeting will result iv .appointing a jury of matrons or a com.d.lun. ing. it would be presumption in us to prophecy. We believe the true ttate of the case is as it was before—the Hipplies having been cut offL ;; }:;

Electricity in Apparent Death.-s-Wg copy the following letter from the Sydney Morning Herald of August 23rd. "To the Editor-rOn looking over an old number of the Illustrated London News y August 12, 1854, I read the- following paragraph :—•' A distinguished physician of Paris, Dr.' Robert de Lambelle, announces that a shock of electricity, given to a patient dying from the effects of chloroform, immediately counteracts its influence, and restores the sufferer to life.' Perhaps that might have benefited the poor woman, Margaret Shepherd.—Elecibiciiy."