CORRESPONDENCE. Withdrawal of the Troops.

Daily Southern Cross, Volume VI, Issue 435, 29 August 1851, Page 3

CORRESPONDENCE. Withdrawal of the Troops.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE. ft SOUTHERN CROSS." Sir, — Any man disposed to bestow, even the most, superficial consideration on the affairs of New Zealand, must, I think, admit that it was from no necessity of protection for the settler from the native that Military occupation was first rendered necessary. From the hour that the first Kororarika Flag Staff was hewn down to that in which Bishop i Selwyn recorded his ever memorable protest, it can be shown that the difficulties (pardon the Californianism) have been all of Imperial, not one of Colonial, creation, — that although a mere Shadowy Sovereignty was professed to be claimed by a lawyei'-like devise of a pre-emptive right ; a vexatious but merchantable monopoly was dexterously secured ! Were I to Attempt even a meagre outline of the imperceptible steps by which the power of the Crown has been acquired, and the toleration of the natives effected, I Bhould, I fear, not only exhaust your space and your readers' patience, but of necessity rctravel much of the same ground you have so clearly, made patent. Indeed so obvious is the fact to the most astute among British statesmen, and so incontrovertible in the eyes of the most intelligent of English Journalists, that we find all of them uniting in condemning tHe maintenance of military establishments as a gross injustice to the British people who pay, and to the Colonial public whom they overawe. In this, as in most public questions, facts and figures are strangely jumbled, — as if the presence of a military force in a colony

must be fatal to, and subversive of, all its hopes of legitimate self-controul ! If the argument were worth combatting, I might be tempted to inquire, why then does England herself maintain a single soldier ? But, without adverting to the many occasions upon which the presence of troops might be requisite, in remote settlements, not only for the support of Colonial inviolability, but for the preservation of Imperial sway, I will at once pass to a consideration of the injustice of their precipitate withdrawal from New Zealand. Assuming, for argument's sake, that a continuance of military establishments and a concession of free institutions are irreconcileable with each other ; let me ask if the object our reformers profess a desire to attain is likely to be accomplished without due preparation? No matter whether a native rebellion were caused by injuries inflicted by the Crown or by the Colonists, both have»been dangerously compromised, .and the present semi-quiescent aspect of affairs has only been purchased at the price of a lavish expenditure of "blood and treasure." Now, sir,- unless' that amount of human and baser metal were disbursed to establish the imperial ascendancy as well as the colonial security, I can only look upon its outlay as a most unrighteous sacrifice of brave men's lives — a most dishonest plundering of the people's purse. One wrong can never justify another ; and one English government having to enforce imperial ascendancy, placed both the nartives and the colonists in a false position with respect to each other, it is but common honesty that no succeeding Government should endanger the colonists or compromise the honour of the nation, by a premature and ungenerous withdraw at of protection. These, however, are matters which you, sir, have already sufficiently set forth ; and I would merely now repeat, however easy and safe the removal of the military from other colonies, that, until the abolition of all the restrictive barriers to the free sale and purchase of land between Europeans and Natives, — until obstructive land purchase Ordinances, and grasping pre-emptive privileges of the Crown be set aside, and the present pacific inclinations of the natives be perpetuated by large infusions of popular measures — until these are got into practical operation, unless the colony is to be cut adrift as a costly and valueless appendage, of the British, empire, — a moderate force for the purpose of temporary demonstration will be found far more economical than any sudden and expensive levy to recover the ground which ought never to have been perilled. Were the colonists of New Zealand easy to be moved in advocacy of their claims, I might be induced to hope that a Memorial in answer not only to the imperfect assertions of the London papers and the Parliamentary reformers, but also of the erroneous statements of their own Governor would be prepared and submitted to a just consideration of the British nation. How, Sir, can Sir William Molesworth, and those who act with him, fail to be impressed with the conviction that a needless and profligate military expenditure is carried on in New Zealand, when we find Sir George Grey complacently dwelling on the facility of military reduction at the very moment he is aggravating his restrictive system of policy ? Sir, it is worth while to look at dates — and if you refer to the last extracts from the Blue Books, you will find that Sir George on the 27th Nov. 1849, leads Earl Grey to believe that at an early date, by aid of a small steam sloop, the military duties of New Zealand may be safely entrusted to one regiment of 540 men. But, accompany his Excellency in an " Overland expedition," undertaken by him immediately thereafter. If you consult a recent number of the " Maori Messenger," you will discover the Kepresentative of Majesty prevented by the natives from attempting the ascent of Tongariro; and, as the narrative declares, to the great disappointment of his Excellency and his suite. But, go a little further, Sir, and wait upon Sir George to Taranaki — where you will find violent hands laid upon his bridle rein, a tomahawk flourished menacingly over his head, the passage before him barred, and he himself compelled to retrace his steps. Is this such an appearance of peace as can justify his Excellency in encouraging the Minister to a premature dismemberment of the forces ? — Or, can it be that his Excellency anticipates his own recall and the removal of the troops as contemporaneous events '( You have yourself alluded to the alarming excitement consequent upon the late assault of a native chief, by a native policeman in the streets of Auckland ; and you have likewise cited the recent expulsion of the Surveyors from Papakura as an evidence at once of the determination and of the forbearance of the, natives. You have painted this last affair, however, in mere water colours. It was much more glowing in detail than in the sketch that you have furnished — notice to quitTiaving been first peremptorily issued, and then an unmistakeable assurance given that boat, baggage, and implements would be destroyed if the notice were not within the time prescribed.obeyed. To conclude, — for my remarks have grown beyond the limit I desired — New Zealand is slowly but surely profiting by her present state of native forbearance. With judicious concessions and a full and absolute acknowledgment of nativ erights that forbearance

will speedily merge into friendship and affection. — The races will become mingled — their interests incidental — and their prosperity inseparable. — As a mere protective impulse to such pacific amalgamation, the presence of the military for two or three years is all essential. — Withdraw them, and not only will the motive be misunderstood, but all for which so much has been sacrificed, in all probability be lost. Would a memorial to the Duke of Wellington be out of place, in what I cannot but deem an impending emergency ? I am, &c., Makcellus.