E.—No. 2.

0"^ English court ' and a11 alik» 18. We are now at the commencement of a new system of management in native affairs There has been something anomalous m the first start; a government in which the assembly has so large a part should be from the nature of the case a Government by law; yet proclamations have been put forth Se° aVof Z1 d y 7« P 1 "'I Ut'Ve t VeT" lent ClailIJed *° exerciae P°wers which* nether the law of England nor of the Colony has conferred on it. Let us regard them as military and extra ord.nary measures, and let us for the future see that in an adherence to the law of England iot only" oSSnT St% ■ C CuT Can aCl; °n n° 1, 6 bllt that Whkh is furnished bJ S law andusa% of England, and nothing could be more unreasonable or unseemly than that we, whilst seeking to E the native people to accept onr system, should be ourselves departing from it, v olatirg thecryl,w of which we are the professed upholders and champions. In factf if we°do not hold fa t to th s Trine nle there remains no limit to the extent of extravagance to which in the present excitement the minds of men may be carried, so as to forget not the mere form of law, but even those fundamental Spiel of fairness and equity which lie at the foundation of our English law, and of our whole EngHs s em 19 A few words may be proper with reference to the general drift of the preceding statement It may be said, with some show of truth, that this is a one-sided statement ; it is Jsomslse onesided it;,s the setting forth of that side of the question which is constantly dropped out of riSt while the other is made as prominent as possible ; yet if ever we are to see our way to a policy that shall heal the troubles of this island we must consider both sides; our policy must be fitted to the facts as they are in truth, not as we may desire them to be. ' If I speak of these things, it is not because I have any pleasure in speaking of them As an Englishman, and for many years a servant of the Crown, I can have no feeling about those tbiuffl but one of sorrow, , not ot shame: yet it is necessary to speak, because our people are as apt to forget tW facts as the natives are to remember them. I know how ignorant the larger part of our poSon is nadvesw °7 5S Col(,7;, b0W m! e » general possess of that peL.fal acquZtaS wi 1 the m nc wkl. would enab d them o .scover how abundant is the material for good in these people with all then- mistrust and stiftnockeducss. I know how many misleading influences are at work • how the crimes commuted on the Maori side are set forth, whilst crimes committed on our side pass unrecorded how many persons in their ignorance readily accept the current mis-statement, that native disaffection is only to be accounted for by a sort of infatuation or judicial blindness aisanecnon 20. In truth L am far from regarding this subject from one point of view only. The true interests of bo h races are inseparable. 1 see the risk of our entering upon a course of policy, whicl™ ado ted, will, 1 believe, entail upon us a chrome smouldering war, attended with heavy loss and demoralisation to our real settlers ill compensated by the increased wealth of a few capitalists in our towns, and which immVl4Ts eVOr U> TnVe ' faU nttraotious in the e7 es of tno better class of English I know the time has come when the folly of Waikato should be checked, and crime be punished • yet so checked and so punished as may become a Government which has not fulfilled its own purpose 'nor Performed its own duty ; as may become a Government which will not accommodate itself to supposed local interests, or narrow views, or popular clamour; but will look straightforward to that which, W |ust and reasonable, will in the end secure the real interests of all the Queen's subjects within thesf to us US S° pr°VC oureelves wor% ofthe power which England has entrusted

Appendix No. 1. "The Supreme Court of the United States, in the case of Worcester, reviewed the whole ground of controversy.relative to the character and validity of Indian rights within the territorial dominions of the United States, and especially in reference to ti.e Cherokee nation, within the territorial limits of Georgia. They declared that the right given by European discovery was the exclusive right to purchase, but this right was not founded on a denial of the right of the Indian possessor to sell. Thou-'h the nght to the soil was claimed to bo in European governments as a necessary consequence of the right of discovery and assumption of territorial jurisdiction, yet that right was only deemed such in reference to the whites ; and in respect to the Indians, it was always understood to amount only to the exclusive right of purchasing such lands as the natives were wilting to sell. The royal grants and charters asserted a title to the country against Europeans only, and they were considered a blank paper so far as the rights of the natives were concerned."— (Eenfs Commentaries, p. 383 ) . Iho decision of the Supreme Court of the United States was not the promulgation of any new doctrine, tor the several local governments, before and since our revolution, never regarded the Indian nations within then- territorial domains as subjects, or members of the body politic, and amenable individually to their jurisdiction. They treated the Indians within their respective territories as free and independent tribes governed by their own laws and usages, under their own chiefs, and competent to act m a national character., and exercise self-government, and, while residing within their own territories owing no allegiance to tho municipal laws of the whites. The judicial decisions in New York and lennessee in 1810 and 1823, correspond with those more recently pronounced in the Supreme Court of the Union, and they explicitly recognised this historical fact, and declared this doctrine The original Indian nations were regarded and dealt with as proprietors of tho soil which they claimed and Occupied, bat without the power of alienation except to the governments which protected them, and had thrown over them, and beyond them their assumed patented domains. These governments asserted and enforced the exclusive right to extinguish Indian titles to lands, enclosed within the exterior lines ot their jurisdictions, by fair purchase, nnder the sanction of treaties; and they held all individual

15

CONFISCATION OF NATIVE LANDS.