ACTS RELATING TO MAORI PRISONERS (LETTER FROM SIR HERCULES ROBINSON, RESPECTING THE). [Reprinted from the Imperial Blue Book, C.-3382, 1882.]

Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1883 Session I, A-05

A.—25

1883. NEW ZEALAND.

ACTS RELATING TO MAORI PRISONERS (LETTER FROM SIR HERCULES ROBINSON, RESPECTING THE). [Reprinted from the Imperial Blue Book, C.-3382, 1882.]

Presented to both Houses of the General Assembly by Command of His Excellency.

No. 1. The Colonial Office to Sir Hercules Robinson, G.C.M.G. Sir, — Downing Street, 25th November, 1880. I am directed by the Earl of Kimberley to transmit to you the accompanying Acts passed by the Legislature of New Zealand in its last session, intituled respectively—(No. 4) "An Act to provide for the Further Detention, for a Limited Time, of certain Natives now in Custody in Her Majesty's Gaols (temporary) ;" (No. 6) "An Act to authorize the Detention for a Limited Time of certain Native Prisoners ;" and (No. 39) " An Act to empower the Governor to settle Outstanding Questions on the West Coast of the North Island of New Zealand :" together with copies of a letter from Mr. C. Bradlaugh, M.P., and of a despatch which has been addressed to the Officer Administering the Government of New Zealand, relative to the detention of the Maori prisoners. Lord Kimberley desires me to request that you will favour him with your observations upon the subject of Acts Nos. 4 and 6, and of the circumstances which led to the passing of them. His Lordship observes that section 8 of the Act No. 39, declares that the Natives arrested by virtue of the provisions of No. G shall be deemed to be in custody under the Act No. 4s, and shall be detained accordingly. This provision would appear to have the effect of legalizing the detention, so long as the Act No. 4 remains in force, of these Natives, who would otherwise have been set free at the end of last October. I have, &c., Sir Hercules Robinson. Robert G. W. Herbert.

SeeGh-?, 188). No. l&Bnelosure.

No. 2. Sir Hercules Robinson, G.C.M.G., to the Earl of Kimberley. My Lord, — 48, Albemarle Street, London, 14th December, 1880. I have had the honour to receive Mr. Herbert's letter of the 25th November last, transmitting to me, by your desire, Acts Nos. 4, 6, and 39, passed by the Legislature of New Zealand in the last session, together with a copy of a letter from Mr. C. Bradlaugh, M.P., relative to the detention of the Maori prisoners, and requesting me to favour your Lordship -with my observations upon the subject of those Acts, and of the circumstances which led to the passing of them. 2. The recent Native trouble in New Zealand, which is now, I hope, in a fair way of being satisfactorily adjusted, may be said to have commenced early last year. A portion of the Waimate Plains, which are situated within the district confiscated in 1865, was then being surveyed by the Government, with a view to its immediate sale by public auction, when the Natives of the district destroyed the survey pegs and stations, and forcibly removed the Government surveyors from the land. This took phice shortly before my arrival in the colony. The Government of the day felt, 1 believe, in some difficulty as to how to deal with this lawless action on the part of the Natives, and nothing was done at the time, beyond withdrawing the notices of sale which had appeared in the Government Gazette. 3. Encouraged, apparently, by this inaction on the part of the Government, the Natives, under the instigation of Te Whiti, the so-called Prophet of Parihaka, next proceeded to enter upon, and plough up, grass lauds within the confiscated district, which had for many years been in the occupation of European settlers under Crown titles. For some time, the Government

Ai—B.

2

interfered only by remonstrance, and it was not until the European settlers had announced their determination to take the law into their own hands, and eject the Natives who were destroying their pastures, that the Government, seeing that strife was imminent between the two races, caused the Maori trespassers to be arrested for forcible entry, and for offences under the Malicious Injuries to Property Act. Some of the less grave cases were tried at ouce before the local Courts, and the offenders were convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for periods of about a year, being required also at the end of their term of imprisonment to enter into sureties to keep the peace. The ringleaders and turbulent characters who had taken a more prominent part in the ploughing operations, were committed by the Magistrates to take their trial before the Supreme Court. 4. About this time (July, 1879) Parliament met. The Grey Ministry were at once defeated upon a vote of want of confidence. A dissolution followed; but before the prorogation a short Act* was passed, authorizing the Governor in Council to fix the time and place for the trial of these Maori prisoners, and to vary such time and place as circumstances might require. This Act was to remain in force only until thirty days after the assembling of the new Parliament; and, as far as I can recollect, no action was ever taken under it, as the trials were postponed by the Supreme Court, with the consent of both sides, until the following January (1880). 5. During the first session of the new Parliament, which commenced in September, 1879, and ended about Christmas, a measure f was passed, authorizing the appointment of a Commission to inquire into alleged Native grievances, and re-enacting the provision in the expired statute to enable the Governor in Council to fix the time and place of trial of the Natives, and to vary such time and place as he might deem necessary, provided that the date to be fixed should not be subsequent to the expiration of the Act, which was to remain in force only until sixty days after the commencement of the next session of Parliament. Under this Act, the prisoners were removed from Wellington, in the North Island, to Dunedin and Hokitika, in the South Island. A Commission also was appointed, consisting of Sir William Fox and Sir F. Dillon Bell, and a thorough investigation was made by these gentlemen into all the Native grievances on the West Coast. During the progress of this inquiry, it was felt that the detention of the prisoners in gaol was indispensable for the peace and safety of the colony; and Orders in Council were accordingly passed postponing from time to time the trials from January, 1880, to the 26th July, 1880, the latest date allowed by law—the new session of Parliament having commenced on the 28th May. 6. So matters stood when Parliament met in May last; and the question which then forced itself upon the consideration of Ministers was, What action was to be adopted with regard to these prisoners during the sixty days available for a discussion of the subject. By this time it was pretty generally understood, that if the prisoners were tried they would be either acquitted through defects in the law, or, if convicted, would receive only nominal sentences. In either case they would have been at once released from confinement. It was also, I believe, acknowledged, by every one competent to form an impartial opinion on the subject, that these prisoners could not at that moment be released with safety. The measures recommended by the Commissioners for the purpose of allaying discontent on the West Coast were about to be considered in Parliament; and it was believed on all sides that if these Natives were released in a body from confinement, and permitted to return to their homes before these remedial measures were determined on and announced, the prospect which then existed of an amicable settlement of the difficulty would be endangered, and the peace of the colony jeopardized. 7. The practical question which Ministers had to consider, therefore, was simply whether Parliament should be asked to pass for the third time an Act authorizing the postponement of trials which there was no longer any real intention of proceeding with, or whether Parliament should be asked to authorize the Government to detain these prisoners in custody for such further period as might be indispensable for the peace and safety of the colony, without any pretence that they were to be tried at some future time, and to empower the Government to release them from custody in such numbers, and at such times, and under such conditions, as might to the Executive Government seem fit. 8. Ministers, I think very properly, decided upon the latter course, which was honest and straightforward, and, both Houses of Parliament concurring thoroughly in this view, the Act No. 4 of 1880J was passed almost unanimously; the duration of the Act being limited to the close of the next session of Parliament, which in the usual course would be practically for a period of about twelve months. I may mention here that, under the authority of this Act, the Government has already commenced to release some of the least dangerous of these prisoners. A letter just received by me from Wellington, dated the Bth October last, contains the following passage : " One batch of Maori prisoners, twenty-five in number, have been released and passed through here yesterday on their way home. They looked well, and had evidently not suffered from their detention in gaol." 9. Within a day or two of Act No. 4 being passed by the House of Representatives, and before it had even been assented to by me, a new movement commenced amongst the Parihaka

* "The Maori Prisoners Trials Act, 1879." t " The Confiscated Lands Inquiry and Maori Prisoners' Trials Act, 1879." J "An Act to provide for the further Detention, for a Limited Time, of certain Natives now in Custody in Her Majesty'sGaols." 23rd July, 1880.

A.-&S""

3

Natives, who proceeded to erect fences in different places across the completed portions of the road which was being constructed through the district by military working parties. The military for some time did no more than, remove the obstructions as fast as they were erected, whilst the fencers were remonstrated with by Government officers in a goodhumoured way, the childish folly of their proceedings being pointed out to them. These remonstrances, however, were unavailing. The Natives were obviously not acting with any settled purpose of their own in view, but simply in obedience to the orders of Te Whiti, in whose supernatural power they entertained a blind, unquestioning belief. As soon, therefore, as it became apparent to the Government that the Natives intended to proceed with these obstructions until some action was taken, a batch of fencers were arrested. When this was done, Te Whiti sent four men every day to the camp to re-erect the fence across the road in the face of the military, with the object, of course, of their being arrested. This went on for five or six weeks, from four to six men being arrested daily without any opposition on their part, until Te Whites stock of men available for arrest was apparently exhausted. The precise object of this extraordinary proceeding was never clearly ascertained. The fencers were of course merely acting under the influence of fanaticism, but what Te Whiti's object was could only be conjectured. It may have been intended to provoke hostilities, the Maoris having a superstitious aversion to drawing first blood ; it may have been the Maori mode of asserting a claim to the land over which the road ran in a way prescribed by some ancient tradition or custom; or, as I think more likely, it may have been simply an ingenious device on the part of Te Whiti, adopted with the twofold object of disposing of some of his followers who were beginning to be troublesome, and of imposing on the Government the cost of maintaining them through the winter in greater comfort than they would have experienced in their own homes in Parihaka, where provisions were supposed to bo running short. However, whatever may have been the object, the result was that the Government found itself with a large number of these fencers on hand, and a difficulty in dealing with their offence under any existing law. Act No. G of 1880* was accordingly passed at once, without any opposition, through both Houses of Parliament. This Act authorized the detention in custody of these men, and of any others who might be arrested under similar circumstances, until the 31st October. The intention of Parliament, however, was not that these men should be liberated on or before that date, but simpiy to provide for their legal detention pending the consideration of the whole question, which the Ministry announced its intention to deal with before the close of the session. 10. The West Coast difficulty was accordingly discussed later on, and the result was the passing of Act No. 39 of 1880,f with, as far as I can remember, the almost unanimous concurrence of both Houses of Parliament. This measure provided for the final settlement of every Native claim or grievance in respect of land within the confiscated territory, in accordance with the recommendations of the Commissioners who had been appointed to inquire into the subject. The Act also constituted certain specified offences against the public peace (of the same character as the ploughing and fencing to which I have referred) misdemeanours punishable at the discretion of the Court by imprisonment, with or without hard labour, for any time not exceeding two years. As the operation of the clauses creating new offences could not be made retrospective, and as the Natives in custody for fencing under Act No. 6 could not with safety be released in a body by. the 31st October, it was determined to deal with them in the same way as the prisoners in confinement for ploughing had been dealt with under Act No. 4; and the Act No. 39 accordingly authorized the detention of these men in custody at the discretion of the Government, until the close of the next session of Parliament, giving power for their discharge at any time previously if it should be considered that such a course could be adopted with safety. 11. I believe that these measures of special legislation were necessary, and that in the perplexing circumstances of the case they were the best that could be devised for the purpose of averting a Maori war. So far, they have been attended with complete success. The Natives were the victims of a delusion, and were for the time beyond the reach of reason. They fully believed that Te Whiti could, if he thought fit, release them from prison and raise them from the dead. The Government was overwhelmingly strong, having about 1,200 well-armed and thoroughly efficient men stationed on the West Coast. If, under these conditions, hostilities had once commenced whilst the Natives were imbued with such a spirit of reckless fanaticism, I believe the result of the contest would have been the practical extermination of the Maoris throughout the district. The strong-handed measures which were adopted to prevent that " beginning of strife " which " is like the letting-out of water/ were, therefore, in my opinion, called for, not so much in the interest of the Europeans as in that of the Maoris themselves. 12. I have written this letter merely from recollection, but I think I have given upon all material points a substantially correct narrative of the events and reasons which led to the passing of the Acts referred to me. Those Acts had not been sent Home when I left New Zealand, the session having closed only a day or two before my departure; but I presume the Administrator, in forwarding them, transmitted also the usual explanatory report on them by the SolicitorGeneral. The local Hansards, also furnished to your Lordship's office, will be found to contain the debates which took place in both Houses of Parliament when these measures were being

* "An Act to authorize the Detention, for a Limited Time, of certain Native Prisoners." 6th August, 1880. t "An Act to empower the Governor to settle Outstanding Questions on the West Coast of the North Island1." Ist September, 1880.

A**sP>

4

passed through their various stages. It will be found, too, that during the seventeen months I ■was in New Zealand, I reported to the Secretary of State by almost every monthly mail all events of interest and importance in connection with the West Coast difficulty which had occurred during each previous four weeks. If there should be any point upon which information is still desired which cannot be found in these various papers, it can easily be obtained from Sir Francis Dillon Bell, who is shortly expected to arrive in London as the new Agent-General for the Colony, and who has as extensive and accurate a knowledge of Native affairs as is possessed by any public man in New Zealand. 13. I think the foregoing narrative contains explanations upon all the points referred to in Mr. Bradlaugh's letter, with one exception, namely, that in which he remarks that "he is informed a deputation of Maori members waited on the Governor, when a solemn assurance was given that the prisoners should be tried in January or February last." This information is not correct. A statement in precisely the same words was made in the New Zealand House of Representatives by Sir George Grey. As soon as I saw a report of his observations on this subject, I laid before Ministers a memorandum giving a most unqualified contradiction to Sir George Grey's statement; and the Premier made a Ministerial explanation in the House, when Sir George Grey admitted in effect that he must have been misinformed. It was scarcely ingenuous of Mr. Bradlaugh's informant to have communicated to him the accusation, and to have concealed from him, as he has apparently done, the refutation of it. I remember that I addressed to the Secretary of State a despatch with reference to Sir George Grey's public misrepresentation of fact in this particular, forwarding also a copy of my memorandum and of the Premier's Ministerial explanation in the House. This despatch is doubtless on record in your Lordship's department. I have, &c, The Right Hon. the Earl of Kimberley, &c. Hercules Robinson.

See G.-7, 1881. Sub-enclosure 10 in No. 2.

No. 3. The Colonial Office to Sir Hercules Robinson, G.C.M.G. Sir, — Downing Street, 12th January, 1881. I am directed by the Earl of Kimberley to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 14th of December, containing observations ■upon the circumstances under which certain Acts of the New Zealand Legislature relating to the Native question were passed during its last session. Lord Kimberley desires me to convey to you his thanks for the explanations contained in your letter. I have, &c, Sir Hercules Robinson. Robert G. W. Herbert.

Authority: GtEOeob Didsbtoy, Q-oyornmenfc Printer, Wellington.—lBB3.