E—No. 2c

8. But the Order in Council which Ministers advised the Governor to sign appeared to be repugnant to the New Zealand Settlements Act in a still more important particular. The law required that the Governor in Council should be satisfied that a considerable number of a tribe, or section of a tribe, had been engaged in rebellion. This clearly presupposed some preliminary inquiry into the facts of the case. Such an inquiry was possible in the case of a tribe or of a section of a tribe; but such an inquiry was absolutely impossible in the case of such an extensive district of country, and of such a number of tribes, as Ministers embraced in the Order in Council they submitted to the Governor on the 17th of May. The number of inhabitants contained within this district was absolutely unknown, and could not within any reasonable "time be ascertained ; whilst the proportion of them which had been engaged in the rebellion it was quite impossible to ascertain. No such inquiry as was contemplated by the Act had therefore taken place, yet Ministers advised the Governor to sign an Order in Council declaring that which implied that such an inquiry had been instituted, and that the Governor was satisfied as to the nature of the result, and that he

European villages, and a large quantity of land owned by Europeans. But declaring such a district did nothing more than describe the outside limits within which any land taken for settlement must be situate. A separate, specific and distinct Order in Council would have been necessary to take even an acre of land under the Act. The object was to define the extreme limits within which land might be taken, and from the manner in which the laud of some of the worst and most murderous tribes was mixed up with both European and friendly Native lauds it was impossible to include the lands of the former without also including those of the latter in a district under the Act. His Excellency is clearly wrong in his view that none but guilty tribes were intended to be included within a district declared under the provisions of the Act. On the contrary, the Act clearly contemplated not only that land being the property or in the possession of innocent people might be included in the preliminary order declaring a district, but even that such land might be taken, whether the property of Europeans or Natives, if required by the public interests, and all the necessary machinery, through Judicial Courts, was provided, for awarding compensation to innocent persons where land might be required and taken. But His Excellency well knows that Ministers did not purpose to take compulsorily any land from innocent persons, even granting compensation under the Act; Ministers in their Memorandum of the 25th of June, informed His Excellency that they "do not consider that it will be necessary to interfere with the properties of the loyal Natives except in some special cases where they hold lands in common with rebels, in which cases Ministers propose to make an equitable division according to the rights of the respective parties, and to confirm the titles of the loyal Natives to their shares by Crown Grants. Already some of the loyal Natives have expressed a wish to make such an arrangement, and others have agreed to receive money in satisfaction of their claims to land which they own conjointly with rebels. Ministers do not contemplate any difficulty in making arrangements with the loyal Natives satisfactory to them as well as to the Government." 8. But the Order in Council appeared to be repugnant The law required that the Governor should be satisfied. It was of course competent to the Governor to profess himself not satisfied of what was potent to everybody else, and to have required some proof; but this he did not do. There would have been no difficulty in making the preliminary enquiry and producing the necessary proof of that which was already established beyond dispute. If the quest ion had been placed on that issue alone the subject of confiscation would have been readily disposed of. At all events, His Excellency would have dealt fairly with his Ministers if he had given them an opportunity of removing his objections. The assertion made by His Excellency that " the number of inhabitants contained within thisdistrict was absolutely unknown, and could not within any reasonable time be ascertained," is surprising. The approximate number of inhabitants is well known, and if it were not, there would not have been the slightest difficulty in ascertaining it, the district being in the immediate vicinity of Auckland. But what had the number of inhabitants to do with the matter —the question was whether a number sufficient to satisfy the terms of the Act had been engaged in rebellion.

3

NATIVE POLICY, CONFISCATION, &c.