EVIDENCE TAKEN IN SELECT COMMITTEE ON

and coming to trade with the settlements, and to place both Natives and Europeans under penalties for carrying on trade.—l think such a law would be very objectionable. It would, in my opinion, cause them openly to rebel, not only in the particular tribe, but their friends, relations, and allies. 14. Is it not possible to establish a blockade on the Manaia capable of hindering, if not stopping, trade? —They have so many ways of obtaining things, not through Europeans directly, that it would be impossible to put a stop to trade, and that would bring the law into contempt. 15. Might it not have a partial effect of placing them under difficulty and risk, in carrying on their trade?—No, by reason of this: when they have any produce to trade, they do not bring it up in their own canoes or vessels, they generally send it by others. 16. You mean that they would evade the law by using other vessels to carry their produce?— Yes, —they would send it by other traders. 17. Would not preventing their using their own canoes have an effect?—No; in many cases of debt, they have evaded the law in the manner I have described. 18. Do you thihk that Natives and settlers, aware of the penalties of the law, would assist in carrying on such a contraband trade?—l think the Natives would, —the European settlers would not. 19. Are there not some of the tribes who do not sympathise with the offenders?— There are. 20. Do you know whether the tribe in the vicinity of the offenders at Coromandel sympathise with them?— They are friendly, but do not approve of their robbery of the powder at Kawau. 21. Do you think they would assist in carrying on their trade?—l think they would, to a limited extent, or as an act of friendship and sympathy —not as sympathising with the offence, but with the person: from these circumstances, I think the law would become inoperative. 22. Would they be induced to assist them with a view to their own profit?—l think not. 23. Have you known of any offences, in your experience, committed by Natives which, in your opinion, would justify so stringent a measure as that proposed?— Yes, —I can remember one or two cases where they openly defied the constables and those sent to take them—they refused to give them 24. Do you think, in such a case, a measure of this kind would be justified?—l have not known any cases in which such a law could be justified; but I have known cases in which they have refused (chief and tribe) to give up offenders. 25. What course of proceedings would, in your opinion, be right and just in such a case?—lf one of the interpreters or commissioners were sent to explain the law, and the necessity of putting it in force?—l think then it would have the effect. 26. Suppose that had been done and failed?—l do not remember such a case. 27. Mr. Williamson.] In the cases you have referred to, what steps were taken by the Government? —It was a similar case to the powder case. It stood over till the Natives came down and gave it up In the first instance, constables were sent to them to execute warrants, to which they have a decided objection. 28. Chairman.] You distinguish between warrants and summonses?—Yes, —Warrants are in criminal cases. 29. Have you known any other cases in which they have refused to attend to a rummons?—No; I have known them to resist warrants, but never refuse obedience to a summons. 30. What would you do in the criminal cases? —I would apply no other rule but that of forbearance ; I would expostulate and reason with them: from my experience, I have found that the most effectual way of dealing with them. 31. Have you known any cases in which the case was brought before the Resident Magistrate and sentenced, where they have refused to obey the law?—l know of no such case. 32. Wfiat effect do you think such a law would have on the mind of the settlers?—l think it might be carried out with the settlers. 33. What would be the effect on the trade of settlers generally?—l think they might have a little misgivings whether the effect might not be injurious to their trade; I think it might be carried out to a great extent with European traders. 34. Is their (settlers') influence generally beneficial?— Not on the whole, —there are exceptions. Mr. White then withdrew. The Committee then proceeded to the consideration of the Bill. Mr. Williamson read a memorandum, which he submitted to the Committee. Mr. Sewell moved, That the evidence and names of parties examined be reported to the House. A debate arising thereon, the further consideration thereof was postponed until the next sitting day. . The Committee then adjourned until to-morrow, Saturday, 2nd August. Saturday August 2nd, 1856. The Chairman moved, That this Committee do report the evidence to the House. Mr. Williamson moved, as an amendment, That the following report be adopted and reported to the House, subject to be altered by the Committee, with the evidence taken thereon.—Carried. Mr. Brown moved, That in the 4th paragraph of the report the words "in this particular instance" be omitted. Question put that the words proposed to be omitted be so omitted.

18