E.—No. 2,

Enclosure 1 in Despatch No. 1. MEMORANDUM setting forth the replies op the natives to the government manifesto of FEBRUARY AND MARCH, 18G0. The following appear to be the principal reasons Replies thereto, for which the Government, in their manifesto published in February and March 1860, maintained that the taking forcible possession of Teira's block of land at the Waitara was not only justifiable but unavoidable.

1. Te Teira's title has been carefully invcsti- An investigation of Teira's title had not been gated, and found to be good. made. It had not been found to be good ; but it was still under investigation. 2. It is not disputed by anyone. It was, and is disputed by many. Te Teira admits, in part, justly. 3. The Governor cannot therefore allow ¥m, William King was not interfering with Te King to interfere with Te Teira in the sale of his Teira in the sale of his own land ; he and his own land. people were contending for houses and homes where they had lived for years. 4. Payment for the land has been received by Payment has not been made for the land, Te Teira, who acknowledged on the 24th of Teira never having received more than £100 February, 1800, to have received the sum of (one hundred pounds) for the land to the present £600 for the land, paid to him by Mr. Parris. time. 5. It now belongs to the Queen. The land never did belong to the Queen ; it never could have been said to belong to the Queen. 6. The right of " mana" was the only right The right of " mana" or sovereignty was not asserted by William King.—(Governor Browne's what William King asserted or relied on. The despatch, 22nd May, I860.) only right he insisted on was that of possession " I have insisted upon this comparatively (meaning occujwtion). " valueless purchase, because had I admitted the " right of a chief to interfere between me and " the lawful proprietors of the soil, I should " soon have found further acquisition of territory " impossible in any part of New Zealand. " Even if the i-ight of " mana," (viz., a feudal " superiority without proprietary right in the " land) exists at all, William King could neither " possess nor exercise it, Potatau, the chief of " the Waikatos, having obtained it by conquest, " and sold all his claims at New Plymouth to " the New Zealand Company. " Without admitting this right (which is the " only one asserted by William King), I could " not, with reason, have rejected the offer made " to me by Teira and his party, because that was " the only obstacle to their selling their land, " and (by the Treaty of Waitangi) they are pre- " vented from selling to any one but the Govern" ment. " It follows that I must either have purchased " this land or recognized a right which would " have made William King virtual sovereign of " this part of New Zealand, which is the object " of his avowed ambition."

Enclosure 2 in Despatch No. 1. REPORT BY LIEUTENANT BATES TO HIS EXCELLENCY THE GOVERNOR. New Plymouth, April 10th, 1863. Sir, — In obedience to your Excellency's instructions, I have made enquiry at the Survey Office as to whether, at the time that the Government took possession of the block of land called Te Pekapeka

3

THE WAITAKA.