ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO

Auckland Star, Volume LXX, Issue 99, 29 April 1939, Page 3 (Supplement)

ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO

New Zealand

lll.—Prelude to 1840—England's Policy Towards New Zealand TILL IS 3 7 the Colonial Office only took an indolent and distant interest in New Zealand, and consistently repudiated all responsibility for its affairs. After that date it accepted official intervention as a painful necessity, and the only question was what form Government action should take. This change of policy has usually been ascribed to the pressure put upon the Government by the New Zealand Company, but such a view would appear to rest on a misconception. Actually, the important decision to annex New Zealand was arrived at from a consideration of the existing state of affairs in New Zealand itself, and independently of the operations of the company in England. Hobson would still have been sent out even if the company had not tried to "force the Government's hands" by dispatching its advance expedition in 1830. First, a word on England's connection with New Zealand before 1837. The New Zealand Company tried in 183 ft to holster up its case by arguing that New Zealand was already a sovereign possession of the Crown by virtue of Cook's discovery. The Colonial Office and the Crown lawyers did not share this view. Tasman, not Cook, first discovered New Zealand, so it was not easy to substantiate the claim on the ground of priority of discovery. Cook had indeed < A —— .

By--Prof. James Rutherford -------

problems of contacts with natives which sooner or later the British Government would have to recognise. Further, it established within reach of New Zealand a Government which soon evinced a disposition to interfere in order to regulate those contacts. The Commissions to the first Governors of New South Wales were sufficiently vague as to territorial limits as to enable Governor M cquarie to regard New Zealand as "a dependency of New South Wales." The most that can l>e said to support this strained interpretation of his Commission is that it was not challenged by the Home Government. In 1814 Mac<l"a rie issued General Orders for regulating the actions of English traders and .settlers in New Zealand, and further appointed the missionary Kendall to act as magistrate at the Bay of Islands. Mursden and Butler, at various times, held similar commissions. In practice, the experiment was never of much real effect. Something more than documentary authority and a pious countenance was needed to restrain the seamen and settlers who frequented the Bay of Islands in those years. In law, the appointments were of dubious validity, and a British str i.te of 1817, explicitly stating that New Zealand was "not within His Majesty's Dominions," set the question at rest. Thereafter, the Colonial Office rapidly multiplied its disclaimers of responsibility for New Zealand. Acts of 1823 and 1828 confirmed the tenor of the 1817 Act. Would-be settlers, including Baron de Thierry, were informed that H.M. Government had no connection with New Zealand, and if they went there they did so at their own risk. Busby was ap-

The purpose or this series of articles ' by the Professor of History at the ( Auckland University College 1* to ; recall the events of a hundred years , ago which led to the establishment of ] the Colony of New Zealand, and in par- s ticuiar, by tracing gome of the leading ; incidents of the year 1840 Itself, to j illustrate the problems and conditions ' , of life which the early pioneers had to j face. In the hope that the human side of the story may be fully brought out, j the articles will be based as closely as possible on the diaries, journals and ' letters of those who participated in ' the events. No attempt is being made 1 to write a history of New Zealand— s only a few leading events will be i selected as typical. i

taken formal possession at Mercury ) Hay in 1709 and at Queen Charlotte's ; Sound in 1770; but lie had not l>een c expressly authorised to do so, nor does s it appear that his action was ever con- ! firmed by the British Government. In ! any case, "proclamation without effec- u tive occupation availeth nothing," and no serious steps were taken to colonise ( New Zealand for nearly 70 years. j The foundation of New South Wales ] in 1789 had a double importance to New j Zealand. From Sydney and Hobart < came traders, missionaries and settlers ( who brought the country into the orbit 5 of English colonial activity, and created s

pewe to the Mother Country, without making any commensurate return; and colonies inhabited by native populations were more expensive than the others, as the Kaffir wars of the Cape Colony proved. The primary principle of policy was therefore strict economy and the avoidance of new responsibilities. On the other hand, the active interest of the English public in philanthropic and missionary work abroad meant that no Colonial Minister could afford to appear indifferent to questions involving native welfare. The appointment of the Resident was the answer that met both requirements of policy—it looked like action, and it cost next to nothing. For the next seven years the Colonial Office salved its tender conscience at the expense of Busbv, and postponed the evil day when it must take more expensive action. As first planned, the Resident was to have had magisterial powers, military support, and a small gunboat. In quick succession these adjuncts of authority were stripped away on the score of expense or administrative inconvenience, and Busby landed in New Zealand in 1833 instructed to establish law and order in a barbarous' foreign country by "moral influence" alone. The elegant Lord Goderich washed his hands of the affair in a phrase: "Even though the failure of the 1832 bill should leave Mr. 1 Busby without legal powers, it is hoped that his mission will still not be unattended with important results, and His Majesty's Government will be acquitted of the reproach of an acquiescence in crimes which they will have done the utmost in their "power to prevent." Busby's labour was not all in vain. ' He was a man of intelligence and ideas, j though he did write top many dispatches ■ to get much else done. By means of the i confederation of the northern tribes he ' sought to create an elementary assembly 1 and executive tribunal capable, under his i guidance, of performing certain collective ' acts, such as granting registers to New Zealand-built ships, arresting and deport1 ——————

pointed British Resident as if to a < foreign State, and was accredited in a ! consular capacity to the native chief.-?, j in whom by a polite fiction sovereignly ( was deemed to vest. And this legal j fiction of the sovereign independence of ■ the tribes was elaborated by the recog- i nition of New Zealand's "national flag' < in 1834, and the "Confederation" of ) 1835. , While lawyers were thus creatin;; ' obstacles to' British action in New Zea- 1 land, the logic of facts was convincing ' the Government tliat steps must be ' taken to control a situation that was rapidly getting out of hand. Dishonest ] trading, and ill-treatment of native sea- , men led to reprisals, such as the "mas- [ sacre" of the Boyd. Commerce in native women, and the nefarious trade ] in preserved heads caused disturbances i all along the coast. The sale of muskets and ammunition stimulated tribal wars; < and Captain Stewart's atrocious conduct i in hiring his vessel to transport Te ! Rauparaha and his war party to Banks' i Peninsula, there to exterminate a whole i tribe, caused such a revulsion of feeling ! that the Colonial Office could no longer 1 turn a blind eye on the situation. Most i reputable witnesses attributed responsi- ] bility for disorders to the misdeeds of i the "pakeha" traders and settlers. "These i men," wrote Marsden in 1830, "feel they 1 are beyond the limits of control, an.l I the masters of ships, I apprehend, are generally as profligate as their men." ] So there came to be tried the strange I experiment of appointing a British 1 Resident—a course which excellently < illustrates the hesitancy and conflicting s purposes of British colonial policy of { the period. For on the one hand there < was the convicTion that colonies invari- i ably proved to be sources of vast ex- 2

<$> ing offenders, and resisting such political adventurers as Baron de Thierry. On those rare occasions when an English gunboat was present the confederation had brief moments of apparent success. Offenders were brought to account and the chiefs were models of good behaviour. But events during the Maori wars of 1830-7 showed its utter lack of authority, and Busby had to confess, complete failure. As early as November. 1830, the Colonial Office admitted to itself that "the state of New Zealand is lamentably bad"' and that Busby could not be expected to mend it. Slowlv and ponderously, in the next three years, it came round to the view that the assumption of direct responsibility was inevitable. Before it bail fully adjusted itself to this distasteful decision the situation was complicated by the New Zealand Association zealously advocating the large-scale colonisation of the country. (To be continued.) <S> :