THE Evening Star. FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 1869.

Evening Star, Volume VII, Issue 1975, 3 September 1869, Page 2

THE Evening Star. FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 1869.

In time to come it will be written of the Colonists of New Zealand, “ They “ sowed the wind and reaped the whirl- “ wind.” Experience, that is said to make fools wise, has found the job too tough to accomplish in the House of Representatives and Legislative Council. It points out in vain that, in justice to districts burdened with the cost of war, but which have no interest in it, no one should be allowed to settle in a locality that invites hostile attack. There are vast areas free from danger both in the North and Middle Islands; areas fertile and not yet settled upon, waiting only for the industrious to develop their capabilities ; yet with a strange pervisity, men are allowed — nay, encourged—to take up land that has already proved to_ be dangerous ground. Again, we invite attention to the contrast between the treatment of

the settlers in the North and Middle Islands. Otago, that contributes so largely to the revenue of tho Colony, is compelled to pay, but is not allowed to borrow, although the money is to be so invested as to be reproductive in the healthiest sense of the word. In Otago there is the best possible security for the repayment of principle and interest. It has hundreds of thousands of acres of rich unsold land ; its inhabitants are numerous and thriving ; its cities and towns increasing and prosperous; its trade the largest in the Colony; its goldfields are productive; its liabilities light. Otago only wanted £50,000, but even that trifling sum is denied. True, the request was acceded to in the House of Representatives, but on terms that ought never to have been mentioned, considering the wealth, intelligence, and importance of the Province. At any rate, it stands proclaimed before the world that Otago, _ the peaceful and industrious the richest, most prosperous, and most important of the Provinces of New Zealand —wanted to invest a sum equal to one-fifth or one-sixth of its annual revenue in reproductive works, and was not allowed to borrow it. How stands the case with the North Island 1 A few settlers, owing to the absence of all sound principles of colonisation, were allowed to settle on the confiscated land at Patea. It was the first district attacked by, we believe, Tito Kowaru at the commencement of the present war. The colonists were driven off" the land, find their farms destroyed. All the colony sympathised with them. Had there been a public subscription to compensate them for their losses Otago would in all likelihood have given the larger share. Whatever we say therefore must be taken to be in condemnation of the system. If through it men are led to invest money in dangerous localities, although they may be properly blamed for rashness and bad judgment, every one must sympathise in their sufferings. They last week brought the story of them before the House of Representatives, through Mr Kelly’s mediumship, and asked a loan to enable them to re-occupy their farms. According to the accounts we have of the matter, Mr Kelly, an unobtrusive man, made out a case so eloquently that not a voice was raised against the proposition—scarcely a condition attached, We thus see how feeling triumphs over reason. Both Otago and the Pa tea and Waitotara settlers ask a loan on the ground of the reproductiveness of the works to be done. In the case of Otago the loan and interest would be repaid with certainty. In the case of the Waitotara and Patea settlers from the very nature of the investment, it is morally certain it never will. In the case of Otago, the works would have been reproductive through fostering the arts of peace ; in the case of the Waitotara and Patea settlers, the loan will almost to a certainty reproduce war and its attendant evils. The looming danger is heralded by Mr Fox’s statement “ that “ the Government was determined not “ to let any of the Waitotara or Patea “ Natives who had joined Tito Ko- “ waRU return to or live in the district. “ The announcement; the Daily Times “ correspondent says, was received with “ cheers, as petitions had been signed “ by 268 settlers, stating that many of “ the rebels were returning to the dis- “ trict, and praying that they might “ not be allowed to do so, as it would “ never be secure while those Natives “ were resident in it.” Now granting that the expelled settlers should be assisted to regain the amount of losses sustained, the better plan would have been to have granted assistance on condition of their settling on less dangerous ground. An exchange could easily have been made, Thei’e is plenty of land unoccupied in safe localities in the Colony, that would have afforded them equal facilities for obtaining a livelihood with that which they have so unwisely chosen. It does not follow that because the land is unused for a few years, the Natives shall be allowed to repossess it; and it needs no soldier to perceive that it is much easier to drive intruders off the land than to maintain settlers upon it. A force that in a single expedition of a few days would drive off hostile Natives, and destroy whatever buildings or crops they might have planted there, would be required to act permanently if those who settle on it are to be protected : so much easier is it to destroy than to conserve. When the inhabitants of a Colony are expected to pay for the protection of settlers in the outlying districts, they have a perfect right to ask whether there is any necessity that dangerous areas should be occupied. It is represented that the district is a fine one, and therefore desirable for settlement. So far as individuals are concerned, if they can be protected, that may be true. So many bushels of corn or pounds of wool may remunerate them for their risk ; they will command an an equal price in the market with the corn and wool grown elsewhere. But what is the cost to the Colony ? We

have no hesitation in saying that each bushel of corn and each fleece grown in the Waitotara and Patea districts costs the Colony as many pounds as the settler obtains shillings for it. There ought to be a definite and sate system of extension of colonisation marked out. New Zealand has been too long ruled empirically. We have had too much sentiment and too little reason in our plans ; no wonder they have failed. We have sown the wind —we are sowing the wind—and we shall again, as we have already done, find a harvest in the whirlwind.