UNKNOWN

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume 7, Issue 446, 16 December 1863, Page 3

UNKNOWN

<From the 'Southern Monthly Magazine' To* Defce'mba-.) The question with which we in New Zealand have found ourselves compelled to grapple are •of a subtle and complicated character. We have to reconcile conflicting elements. We have to encroach upon the .possessions of others without.committinginjustice, to seize by force that ■which we most require for bur own uses without exhibiting a spirit of rapacity, to rescind treaty engagements without breaking faith, to civilize with the edge of the sword, to secure the interests of humanity and progress by a process of war, 'conquest, and confiscation, to induce a race of men who always suspected our friendship while ■our swords were sheathed, to believe in it now when we press upon them with increasing forces, •drive them from their habitations, and occupy their land ; and all this we have to do in consequence of difficulties into which we have been led ■either by others than ourselves, or by the inevitable course of events, and out of which we have •to get by conduct of which the responsibility has beea suddenly and unceremoniously thrown ■upon us. To do these things seems to require a ■combination of high qualities. Unflinching courage, judicial impartiality, administrative skill, the calmness of the philosopher, the knowledge of the political economist, the benevolence of the philanthropist, and the practical skill of the financier, seem to be all necessary in order to steer us safely through bur present maze of difficulties, 'and if we can find these qualities in bur community, we need not blush to submit our policy to.the. scrutiny and criticisms of the leading nations of the world.

To meet these pressing difficulties, the late Government of New Zealand has put forth a scheme, *nd the present Government, composed partly of the same members, has adopted that scheme, so far as its fundamental principles are concerned. It is a scheme which at once and for ever subverts the footing on which we have hitherto stood with regard to the Maori race, and alters irrevocably #he relations existing between ourselves and them. It is a scheme, in short, for swamping the Maori by numbers, and for colonizing the land by force. To accept this scheme, as it has been accepted -almost universally throughout the colony, and as ■we for our part are prepared to accept it, is a step which at once confronts us with the question whether the whole of our former dealings with the Maori have not been based upon a false theory and a mistaken view of our rights and -obligations ; our rights, with respect to occupation of land, and our. obligations, with respect to the elevation and preservation of a savage race. The right of the Maori to the whole of the land ■of this country, and the duty of the colonist to save a number of savages from the extinction to which they were hastening, have been, at all •events practically, the fundamental principles upon which the British Government has caused the colonization of this country to be conducted. Both positions however appear to us, by the new light which recent events have thrown upon the subject, to be of more than doubtful validity. The advocate of the right of the Maori to the possession of all the land in this country for which •he has not received cash, has always appeared to ■content himself with the statement of his proposition as an axiom, not, we fear, because it is self-evident, but on account of the other characteristic which goes to constitute an axiom, — that it is incapable of proof. It seems almost incredible that so monstrous a delusion should ever have iheld its ground, and we incline to the belief that this principle was acted on, not on account of its •clearness, but because, in the early days of the Colony, it was found more convenient to fight with "silver lances" than with steel ones. It is difficult to understand what law of providence or of nature permits men to retain by force large tracts of land which is useless to themselves and required for the sustenance of others. It doos not seem necessary to go into any very refined -disquisition upon the nature of property, or the .grounds upon which the right of it is based. We will for the present adopt the philosophy which takes "the fitness of things" as the basis of all rights and obligations, and thiß principle will lead us to the opinion that while it is just and reasonable that a man's right to the land which he holds and cultivates, or means to cultivate, should be respected, there is no fitness or propriety whatever in allowing him, like the dog in the manger, to retain in a barren state the land which is the gift of providence to the human race. The philanthrophy which adopts a different principle, is, we believe, a fallacious philanthrophy, and we unhesitatingly affirm that we might, at the commencement of our colonization here, have taken and held by force any land not actually occupied by the natives, without violating any law of justice or humanity. We have on the contrary, by abdicating the rights which were ours, placed ourselves in an essentially false position, and laid up for ourselves a heritage of embarrassments and perplexity from which we are now compelled to free ourselves by a practical renunciation of our former principles.

The second point which we took for discussion is the, supposed obligation under which we lie to save and elevate the Maori race. This obligation ; we look upon as at least doubtful. It is doubtless our duty to treat the Maori with justice and humanity, and to impart to him whatever he may be willing to receive of our superior cultivation, but to preserve the Maori race from extinction is not in our opinion a thing to be set before us as a definite object. Our meaning will at once become clear by putting the question whether it is on the whole best that a oountry should be peopled and occupied by men of English race, or by an equal number of men of whom a portion should be Maori. The answer to this question depends entirely on the consideration—which is the superior race ?— which presents the highest perfection of human organization ?, If the answer is in favor of the English race, then it is better they should inhabit. the land, and if we find that by the operation of natural laws the decline and extinction of the inferior race ..is being effected, we are hot to assist the process but admire the result. This may be looked upon : 'as. the frigid conclusion of men who look upon \ the problems of human society, with the scientific curiosity of zoologists or political economists, yet it seems to us a conclusion as consistent with an enlightened benevolence asit is with sound reason. We are not called

upon to prop by artificial means a declining race ; all that we are bound to do is to give it fair play, and the .question of preponderance for one, or extinction for either race,, will be settled by laws which will |$c wiser than we or our philanthropy* If the Maori 7 will not avail himself of the means which ate placed at his disposal by contact with a superior race, he must take the consequences-; and there is no fear but that his place will be properly supplied.

The two principles, therefore, on which our former dealings with the Maori have been based, appear to fail. Acting upon the first, we made the Treaty of Waitangi ; and now, finding that worthless, we have annulled with it the principle upon which it relied. Acting upon the second, we subsidized the Maori to enable him to taste something of a civilization which he was not prepared to win, and bribed him into conformity with laws whose excellence he could not understand 5 and now we have resolved to let him take his own course, and to leave him to the operation of those natural laws which over- rule so calmly and sternly our inaccurate conclusions and our crude schemes.

The Treaty of Waitangi is done with. Whatever may be alleged for or against it as a measure of some utility at the time of its construction, it is now well out of our road. No longer upon its clauses can we rest our claim to sovereignty, or the Maori his title to land. The artificial relations between us and him are at length swept away, and we are reduced to the necessity of falling back upon fundamental principles, which fortunately are clear and simple enough. We have first to establish ourselves as the dominant power, and then to maintain justice, law, and order.

The present war is a war of colonization. Whatever may have been the immediate or proximate cause, this is what it essentially is, and in this point of view we maintain it to be a profitable war. We care not who Btruck the first blow ; we are satisfied that it was sure to be struck by one party or the other. With the cenduct of the war we have nothing now to do ; we rest satisfied in the statesman-like scheme which follows up the military operations by establishing a chain of military settlements to secure the peace of the country. We wish now briefly to consider the two questions :— How are we to treat the enemy during the war 1 and how are we to treat him after the war ? In considering the first point, we are met at the outset by the doubt whether we are to look upon the Maori as a rebel or a belligerent. So far as the matter can be decided by the law of the country, there is, we suppose, no further room for discussion. The Chief Justice of New Zealand has ruled that in the eye of the law every human being within its limits is a subject of Queen Victoria, and in the decision of the Chief Justice we readily acquiesce. Yet it is unfortunate when the legal view of an important matter is at variance with that which must be taken by those who wish to look at the subject fairly, and according to its intriusic merits. We do not hesitate to assert that in truth and fairness the Maori must be considered not as a rebel, but a belligerent ; and that the prisoners taken by us are prisoners of war, and ought to be treated as such. In discussing this matter people are very apt to mix up things which have nothing to do with each other, and they often argue as if the Natives are to be treated as rebels, because they have committed great barbarities. If they have done these things, let them be treated accordingly ; but this has nothing to do with the question whether they are to be looked on as aliens or subjects in arms. If they are subjects, it must be by virtue of the Treaty of Waitangi j but this, we submit, places them in a very different position from men who are born subjects without any Treaty at all. It may be that legally their obligation as subjects remains, when the Treaty is broken by their own act ; but even in this case rebellion is a very different thing in the Maori from what it is in a natural subject. But, setting aside technicalities, let us see how far the Maori is really culpable in resisting our sway. Our answer to this is, that his sole and whole crime consists in ignorance of what is good for him. This is a crime, we admit, which nature generally punishes severely. We scarcely think the Maori morally bound by the Waitangi Treaty ; we are uncertain how far the Maori nation was a party to it ; we.are sure that as a nation they did not understand the sovereignty they were ceding. But we convict the Maori of blindness in not seeing the utter futility of his efforts to resist a power, and the great advantages to be gained by submitting to it. We convict him of folly in rejecting the only salvation there is for his race. Of these offences he will suffer the just punishment, but there is no reason why we should hold him guilty of a factitious offence, and exact from him an arbitrary penalty. He fights for a lawless freedom, and if we have not the power, we have not the right to subdue him. We have the power and the right, but we are not justified in treating him a's a criminal for resisting us. We hold then that the Maori is a belligerent, and entitled to belligerent rights ; butijiis replied that the atrocities he has committed jEairly_deprive him of those rights. • We admit, the principle that a party may so carry on war as to justify the refusal of the enemy to allow him aiiy belligerent rights, but we do not think that this' point of atrocity has yet been reached, by ,the Maori. He has shown indeed that, he wishes rto make this a war of extermination, and he has committed cruel and barbarous murders. He, therefore, could have no ground of complaint if we were to act similarly. But we must remember that the Maori has still observed the usages, of war. He has broken no engagement ; he has fired upon no flag of truce, and these are the offences which deprive a belligerent of his rights! Retaliation for the murders committed is, of course, not to be thought of beyond the punish:, ment of the murderers. We give our voice for hanging any of these that can be taken, but While we do so, we see -plainly: enough the distinction between homicide ! committed -without /personal malice, and for a national -object, and the. ordin 7t ary murders for, which pur criminals are brought to. the gallows. The murders' committed by me Maori arc savage and ferocious, but they are justified to his mind by the supposed necessity of weakening the pakeha in every way. National hate is not so bad as private malioe. We are pre-

pared to make some allowance for the savage ignorance 6i the Maori, as well as for the equally savage ignorance of tttose who cry out for the blood of unarmed .prisoners, and who would wish to see the pakeha become a worse barbarian than the Maori himself. The prisoners now in our hands were taken by our General as prisoners of war, and were complimented by him on their gallant resistance. -This chivalrous conduct presents a pleasing contrast with the blatant clamour which; under the name of justice, seeks really to satisfy a coarse feeling for revenge. ■: When the war is over it will be the object of the Government, we rejoice to find, not to drive the Maoti to his mountain fastnesses, but to give him every facility for sharing in our civilization. This, if we effect it, will be the greatest triumph of all ,• but to efiect it, we must show by our conduct now that we do not seek his destruction, but only his reduction under the rule of law. Having conquered Mm, we are bound to give him the chance of acquiring our civilization with its rights and privileges. How best to carry out this is a subject not within the limits of this paper, We maintain then that to admit the right of savages to broad lands which they cannot use, is a perversion of the arrangements of nature, and a fraud upon our own race ; that to squander money, and waive our just rights in the attempt to, save from extinction a declining race is a course which will be rewarded by ingratitude or disappointment ; and that our war is essentially a war of colonization, and justifiable on that ground. We maintain further that when a party is strong enough to become belligerent dt facto, it becomes one de jure and must be treated as such. We maintain that nothing has occurred yet to deprive the Maori of his belligerent rights, and that the cry for indiscriminate vengeance shows a state of mind in which base and ignorant selfishness predominates. We assert lastly, that as this is a war of colonization, and as freedom, law, and justice are necessarily elements of English colonization, we are bound to extend these benefits to the Maori, if he will have them. To do this we must cultivate among ourselves and the soldiers whom we are raising amongst us as the future defence of our civilization, the virtues of humanity and chivalrous courtesy ; not call them to aid us in subduing barbarism, and suffer them to become barbarians themselves by indulging in an indiscriminate desire for sanguinary revenge.