E—No. 1

No. 12. COPY OF A DESPATCH FROM GOVERNOR GORE BROWNE, C.8., TO HIS GRACE THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLE. Government House, Auckland, New Zealand, 13th July, 1861. My Lord Duke, — The statements contained in the Bishop of New Zealand's printed letter forwarded in my despatch No. 100 of the 12th instant, and the frequent reference made to the Eeport of the Waikato Committee, induce me to trouble your Grace again on the subject. I should be deceiving Your Grace were I to allow you to believe that either the Report of the Committee or the statement of the Bishop gives an accurate account of the object of the King movement. I am prepared to shew that the true character of the King movement was not an effort to obtain law and order, but an effort on the part of the Maori Chiefs to recover the power which they enjoyed before the introduction of Christianity; to separate their people from the Europeans; and to secure the recognition of a distinct nationality, with power to administer law—not in the name of the Queen, but in that of their Maori King. Their object was to make use of the law as an instrument of power, but they had no idea of submission to it. Walter Kukutai, one of the principal Chiefs who supported Mr. Fenton, says, " the cause of it (the King movement) was following our mana (power), lest it should be taken away by the Pakehas—lest the mana should be completely trampled on by that of the Pakehas. Their discontent was from this (fear), lest the mana of New Zealand should altogether go to the Queen." (See page 35, Q. 573, Evidence before Waikato Committee.) "Before the King was established the Maori laws were kindness, &c, &c, and holding the lands so as not to let them go to the Pakeha." (Q. 579, page 35.) William Thompson in his letter to me, in reply to my declaration, dated 21st May, to the Waikato tribe, says, " Why am I or these tribes rebuked by you, and told that we must unite together under the Queen ? How was it the Americans were permitted to separate themselves ? Why are they not brought under the protecting shade of the Queen ? for that people are of the same race as the English. Whereas I am of a different race, not nearly connected. My only connexion with you is through Christ. Were all the different islands under one sovereignty, i hat of the Queen, it would be quite right; no one would differ; all this island would also be united with the rest. Instead of which, each is separate, and I also, standing in my own thought, which is this, that I must have a King for myself." Nothing can be more distinct than this assertion of a desire for distinct nationality, and there is evidence equally clear and conclusive, that the introduction of " law and order," as administered by us, was not what the leaders of the King party intended or desired. Agreeing as I did, and still do, with Your Grace, in thinking Mr. Fenton's report of 1856 very able and suggestive, I appointed him to act as a Resident Magistrate in the Waikato, in order that he might introduce law and order, and put his own suggestions into practice. Subsequent events, however, enlightened me as to the truth. The representative of English law and order (Mr. Fenton) was protested against by Potatau and Tamati Ngapora, in the name of the Chiefs who formed the King party; and in deference to their wishes he was withdrawn. It is true that Mr. Fenton did not attempt to conciliate the old Chiefs, and that he was wrong in not making every effort to secure their acquiescence; but the fact that such efforts were necessary to procure toleration for his scheme, proves that no such craving for law and order existed among the leaders of the King movement as the European defenders of that agitation have sought to establish. Mr. Whitaker, the late Attorney-General, was of opinion that Mr. Fenton might have been left in the Waikato with advantage, not because he believed that he would succeed in the mission for which he was sent, but because he had formed what was called a " Queen party"; and as he (the Attorney-Geueral) even then thought collision inevitable, he considered it better to have a party on our side. I believed it to be my duty to prevent collision if possible, and I had also a firm conviction that the younger men, who in general favoured the Queen's party, would abandon it at the first national cry ; I therefore consented to the withdrawal of Mr. Fenton, in the hope that when the alleged cause of irritation was removed the agitation would cease, which indeed it did for some time afterwards. That the Waikato Committee should have arrived at a different conclusion is not surprising; my Advisers, who were acquainted with the real facts, were satisfied that the Committee was not in a position to form a true estimate on the subject, and kept aloof from an enquiry which the labors of the Session prevented their having time to guide. h Mr. Domett, a member of the Committee, says, " Now, with respect to that Report, I must si say I think it was rather a hurried one (No! from Mr. Fox); at all events it is not to be taken R as infallible. There is, undoubtedly, a great deal of useful information in it, but it goes too far '" if it attributes the King movement solely to a desire in the Waikato for law and order (No! from Mr. Fox). No doubt it is quite possible that years ago the first dissatisfaction of the Waikato may have arisen from their desire for law and order; but the character of the movement very goon changed, and their desire for a King meant a great deal more than that. With regard to

GDFGFDGFDGFD

23

TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE.