EUROPEAN v. NATIVE LAW.

Wairarapa Standard, Volume I, Issue 50, 16 December 1867, Page 2

EUROPEAN v. NATIVE LAW.

At the close of the last session of the General Assembly, the Legislators, of New Zealand were congratulated upon the extraordinary number of bills that had been passed through the two houses. It .seems never to havo occurred to our representatives that the number of bills passed, many have been attributed, with some good show of reason, to a want of due deliberation and discussion, from either a want of ability in the House, or from the absence of a good, strong and organised opposition ready to seize upon the reins of Government, whenever the present occupants of the Treasury bench would exhibit their unfitness to retain them. Many of those enactments that were so proudly and boastfully spoken of in the prorogation speech were absolutely nothing more than a series of blundering attempts of incompetent members to amend cr reoxiact and perpetuate the blundering mistakes of former sessions. Wo shall have occasion to comment upon several instances of this. At present we purpose taking a hasty glance at an “ Act to consolidate and amend the laws relating to Rosidcn and Justicesof the Peace on civil matters.” It was with no small amount of astonishment and surprise that we found theft having a place in an act rein dug to civil matters, and the thief if discovered and coiuicted only treated as a debtor, that gives tite value of the stolen property 'V’ith interest not exceeding 800 per cent added to the principal. But the thief must bo one of the native race, before the Act dated 10th October, 180?, converts the convicted thief into a debtor that shall be discharged by the Resident Magistrate as soon as the Maori thief gives security that he will pay a sum of money not exceeding four times tho value of tho stolen property. After the money that has been spent, after nil the blood that has been spilt to have one law lor the Natives and another for Europeans, it is absolutely, to say the least .painful to see the General Assembly of this colony in 1807 re-enact such a law as this.

We have no space to make any further commenton this unumqljous Jaw to-day, but we shall probably return to it in our next issue.