EARL GRANVILLE'S DESPATCH.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume 13, Issue 1077, 24 August 1869, Page 3

EARL GRANVILLE'S DESPATCH.

[From the 'Standard/ June i] The despatch of Lord Granville in reply to an application for an Imperial guarantee to a New Zealand loan, fairly deserves the credit of being the most foolish and mischievous act committed since the days of tord North in the cololtiai policy of Great Britain. And wnen we know what has been the history of the Imperial management of New Zealand affairs since 1840, this is a bold thing to say. Regarded from any point of view, it is hardly possible to conceive any course more unjust to. the colony, more pernicious to the well-being of the empire, more injurious to humanity, more disgraceful to the nation, than that which Lord Granville has deliberately adopted in the matter pf the New Zealand claims* ' The long series of New Zealand blunders and follies is capped by this almost incredible achievement; and of this supreme act of Imperial misgovernment, itmay.be I said that it is a fitting conclusion to an episode in the colonial history of Great Britain which has been from first to last discreditable to the mother country. Whether we regard it as a final answer to the cry for help from New Zealand, or as the programme of the new policy to be pursued in rega'td to the colonies, itis hardly possible to exaggerate the importance of Lord Granville's dispatch. As to the immediate subject of this extraordinary state paper, it may be necessary to explain that the Government of New Zealand being sorely pressed for want of money, have applied through Mr. Fitzherbert, their, agent in. England, to the Imperial authorities for a guarantee of a new loan to the extent of £1,500,000. Their necessities have arisen mainly from the enormous expenses to which they have been subjected through a long series of Maori wars, the whole of which has been incurred strictly in the Imperial interest, and not only with the sanction, but under the direct control and management! of the Imperial authorities. The total debt of the colony being now £7, 000,000, at an interest of 6. per cent., and its whole revenue barely one million, the local Legislature, in the prospect of another Maori war of a more dangerous kind than any which they have had yet to encounter, have applied to the Imperial Government, not for any loan or subsidy, as they might reasonably have done, but merely for such an extension of the Imperial credit in their behalf as might enable them to raise a new loan on terms hot ruinous to themselves. This request Lord Granville has met with a fiat negative, denying that New Zealand has any claims upon the Imperial Government, and asserting certain general principles as to the relations between the colonies and the mother country. The document is of so novel and important a character that it is necessary we should deal with each of its clauses categorically. . Lord Granville begins with the statement that " a number of Englishmen, without any "invitation or encouragement from the English Government, took on themselves to form one or more settlements in the islands of New Zealand. The Government of the day considered itself responsible for placing the relations between these British subjects and the natives among whom they settled on a reasonable basis, and for securing order among tbe settlers. It therefore acquired the islands by treaty from the natives and established a regular Government in the settlements." This is a perfectly accurate account of the origin of the New Zealand colony. Not only, however, does it not acquit the Imperial Government of any present obligation to New Zealand, but it furnishes the strongest possible case in favour of the colony. The conditions under which New Zealand was possessed by a British race are not peculiar to this colony, except in one respect only, which Lord Granville has duly noted — that the rights of the aborigines to the soil were strictly regarded and preserved. In other respects New Zealand was founded precisely as all otber English colonies have been' founded which were not penal settlements. In every case there was first a landing of unlicensed individual adventurers, as a stage preliminary to the occupation of the territory by the Imperial Government. But how does this release the Imperial Government from its obligations to the settlers after they have become formally recognised ? Why should New Zealand be reminded of an origin which is precisely similar to that of all colonies ? Upon Lord | Granville's own showing, the act of the settlers in going to the islands " without \ any invitation or encouragement" was accepted and confirmed by the British Government. Therefore, that act can no longer be pleaded against the settlers. Again, Lord Granville declares that the Government considered itself responsible for placing the relations between the British settlers and the natives on a reasonable basis. This, again, is the very case of the colonists. They allege that the obligations which, according to Lord Granville, the Imperial Government undertook, have not been fulfilled. They ask for help to discharge those obligations. They aver that, | so far from having placed the relations between the British settlers and the natives on a reasonable basis, the Imperial Government grossly neglected and mismanaged those relations — that, after they had failed in their task, and when in the midst of the I confusion and trouble caused by the failure, ! they shifted off their obligations on the coi lonists. Therefore, the reason given by ! Lord Granville for refusing to recognise the New Zealand claims, is only an argument the more in behalf of their soundness. The next positive statement of Lord Granville is not true in fact, and is not material, if it were true. It is a gross perversion of history to say that " the Government was answerable at first to the Home Government, afterwards almost wholly to the settlers." In regard to the only point which is essential to the question; the management of the relations between the settlers and the natives — the one object for which, according to Lord Granville, the Imperial Government annexed the islands of New Zealand — the entire rule and conduct of colonial affairs were in the hands of the Imperial authorities. From 1840 to 1862 the Imperial Government retained the sole management of native affairs, and it is they • and only they who are responsible for the j results of that management. Nor is it true, | as alleged by Lord Granville, in another part pf, his, despatch, that the trans fer of; the obligations of the Imperial Government in respect to the native race from the Crown to the colony was made "in compliance with the direct and indirect demands ofthe

colonists, On the contrary, it is notorious tbat tbe colonists in 1862, protested in every possible way against the management of native affairs being transferred to them. It is true that some time before they had tfeen willing to undertake this responsibility, when they perceived in what a blundering Way it was being discharged by the agents Of the Imperial Government ; but they naturally declined the task when it had been brought, by Imperial mismanagement, to the point of hopeless confusion. It is impossible that Lord Granville can be ignorant of the fact that when it was proposed by Sir George Grey, at the end of 1861, that the local Parliament should have the control of native affairs, a motion to. that effect was negatived by the two Houses, who joined in an address to the Crown, stating that the Imperial Government bad always jealously retained the management of the natives in its own hands ; that it alone was responsible for the anarchy which then prevailed ; that "to replace this anarchy by habits of law and order was a task too great to be undertaken by the colonists," but agreeing to accept the future control of the natives after tranquillity and the authority of the law had been secured. Neither can it be unknown to Lord Granville that the only great measure which the. colonists proposed for the settlement of the disputes with the natives —the Native Lands Bill of 1858— the object of which was* to confirm and to simplify the native rights of property by giving them a legal English character — was disallowed by the Imperial Government, though afterwards assented to and adopted with the happiest results. It is difficult to understand what Lord Granville means by declaring that "It was never at any time attempted to make New Zealand tributary to Great Britain, or to direct local affairs in such a way as to produce any political or pecuniary advantage to this country," This is an idle and foolish piece of clap-trap, having no reference to the question. Inasmuch as no colony has ever been made " tributary to Great Britain" — inasmuch as none of them have been governed with an eye to the pecuniary advantage of the mother country — inasmuch as New Zealand has never pretended that she was so governed, Lord Granville's argument is mere empty surplusage. No one has said that the colony of New Zealand was governed with any other view than that of " the real or supposed advantage of the inhabitants." The position of the New Zealand colonists is that a false view was taken.of their interests -—that the supposed advantages were not real advantages, and that for the results of this blunder it is not only they who ought to be responsible. The circumstances which led tb the great Waikato war of 1862-63 are not correctly stated by Lord Granville. The attempt to connect this war with " the great and not unnatural desire " on the part of the colonists to acquire the native lands, is most disingenuous, and is flatly contradicted by history. "The Governor," it is said, " holding, as an Imperial officer, the position of protector of native rights, but also anxious to gratify the desires of the colonists, took a step satisfactory to his responsible advisers, to the local Legislature,- and apparently to the mass of the colonists." . The facts are these : so far from being anxious to gratify the desire of the colonists for the lands of the natives Sir George Grey inaugurated his second government by giving back to the Maories the Waitara block, although the colony had acquired it by fair purchase from its reputed lawful owners, with the consent of the then agent of the Imperial Government. There was no other question of native lands at that time but this. The Waikato war, which, it is audaciously affirmed by Lord Granville, was undertaken "entirely in the interests and with the approval of the colonists," was a war which the Imperial authorities, both at home and in the colony, declared to be for Imperial interests and in. revenge of Imperial injuries. It was commenced on Sir George Grey's own responsibility, nearly six months before the opening of the local parliamentary session, and before any public opportunity had been given to the colonists to consider its policy. This is Governor Grey's own language to the colonial Parliament : — " Every endeavour has been made to remove any even ap- . parent ground of complaint, to do them (the natives) the fullest justice, and to promote their welfare and improvement. Yet no means have been found effectual to induce them to relinquish their schemes of conquest and plunder. They have deliberately resolved upon war, and to try their strength with the British race." In his despatch to the Colonial Secretary justifying the commencement of hostilities, Sir George Grey reported that "Just after these murders (the assassination of Captain Ring and a party of soldiers in the bush, and of some outlying settlers on the Waikato frontier), plots were formed by the same people and their adherents in the Lower Waikato for an attack upon the settlement of Auckland, and that the natives were all well armed, and had been long preparing for such an enterprise." The proclamation issued by the representative of the Imperial Government on the eve of hostilities declared that "those who were at war against her Majesty, or remain in arms threatening the lives of her Majesty's peaceful subjects, must take the consequences of their acts, and they must understand that they will forfeit their right to the possession of the lands guaranteed to them by the treaty of Waitangi." The testimony of the Bishop of Waiapu, for forty years a missionary among the natives, and one of the warmest supporters of the Maori claims, as given in a public letter to the Colonial Government (April 30th, 1864), is also to the effect that the War was not caused by any desire on the part of the colonists to acquire the native lands, but solely and simply out of hostility to the British race, and opposition to the Queen's authority. Finally, we have Mr. Cardwell, Lord Granville's present colleague, declaring (September 26th, 1864) in a published despatch, that "it is right and necessary to remember that the origin of the present war was the murder of two officers and nine soldiers, who were most shockingly assassinated by ,6rder of some ofthe Upper Waikato chiefs." We need not adduce any further evidence in refutation of the insinuation that the late Governor of New Zealand, the agent of the British Crown, made war upon the natives to gratify the " great and . not unpatural desire." on the part ofthe colonists to acquire the lands of the natives. It is quite as easy to refute by the aid of official documents, out ofthe mouths of „.•■'• ■'•'.- s '.-

i the Imperial agerits themselves, tbe not less monstrous allegation that the territory ' which the colony is said to have wrongfully acquired, by the confiscation of the lands of the rebel tribes, has been the cause of the subsequent difficulties into . which the colony has been plunged., Whether the ."confiscation policy" was right or* wrong, the responsibility of it is fully shared by the Imperial Government. It was first proposed by Sir George Grey himself in a despatch to. the ' Duke! of Newcastle, dated 29th August, 1862,; without consultation with the local Legislature, the Colonial Parliament being then, and for six months after, in recess. The proclamation to the Waikato tribes, from which we have already quoted, proves that fair warning was given to the natives of the consequences of their rebellion. Finally, we have again Mr. Card well's approval, . within certain limits (which have not been passed) of the confiscation policy, jn his despatch of April 26fch, 1864. Under these circumstances what are we to think "of the good taste or the justice of Lord Granville's sarcasm that "the Imperial • Government have not transferred to " itbat ' of the colony any obligation whatever,, except that imposed on all of us by natural justice, not to appropriate the property of others." That which was appropriated (of which threefourths have since been generously restored to .their owners) was,; the property of those who were either rebels; or enemies. If rebels, then their land was fairly' forfeited, according to all. human laws. If enemies, the land was the prize of war, appropriated according to a perfectly well-known rule and universal custom^r-a rule and custom which no people acknowledge. more clearly than do the Maoris, of whose own right of property they are the origin and foundation. But whether rebels or enemies, they could not be rebels to the colony, nor were they enemies of any other 1 but the Imperial Government. The Maoris never owed or professed any allegiance' to the colony. Their allegiance was to the Crown ; and in this way was the responsibility shifted by the Imperial to the local Government, that the Crown required the colonists to undertake what to them was virtually a foreign war partly at their own expense. To expect the colony to continue the war, which is the result of Imperial policy, and the consequence of a failure on the part of the home authorities to discharge that which, according to Lord Granville's own confession, was. ai- duty they undertook in 1840, at its own .post and charge in future, is grossly unjust and contrary to every principle of right arid policy". Granted that the colony was " governed with a uew to the real or supposed advantage of the inhabitants," it is no fault of the inhabitants if this end has not been attained. The foundation of the present claim of New Zealand upon the mother country is simply that the advantage of the inhabitants, including in that term both Europeans and natives, has not been secured by the Imperial Government; The broader question raised by Lord Granville in the repudiation of the New Zealand claim, needs fuller discussion than we can give it in this place. It is enough , at present to say, that the principles laid down in this despatch, without parallel for its audaoity qf statement, and its mischievousness among, English state papers, proclaim a complete revolution in the whole of our Imperial system ; and are virtually a a notice to all the colonies that they are henceforth discharged from the empire. [From tho " Sydney Herald, ". August 10. J The letter addressed- by eminent New Zealand colonists, including the late Governor, to the Governor of New Zealand, is one of those solemn documents from which it is impossible' to turn away. The people of New Zealand are not so wild ur so wicked as to , attempt at the present moment the establishment of a separate Government and involve themselves in the difficulties and dangers of a civil war., They are not so. forgetful of their country or their kindred as to desire a final severance of that connection which has hardly had time to display, its real worth. We dismiss as mere folly all those appeals to the judgment of. nations as against our own, and those resolutions to maintain the attitude of insurgents pledging by "our lives and fortunes and sacred honour !" The remonstrance of the authors of the letter is, however, calculated to arouse the attention of British statesmen to the real facts of the case, and to show how a mistaken view ofthe state of affairs has led to an unjust because peremptory relinquishment of the duties of protection. Before blaming the British nation that has been given to understand that the colonists area body of land sharks— -that they are too lazy and too rich to defend themselves, it is the duty of colonists to endeavour to make their case plain to the representatives of the people. The mass of Englishmen are in their normal condition totally ignorant of colonial affairs, and those who possess a principal influence overthe Press take up too . readily any cry..!whic_i!has! the' air of probability and which opjens a : fair field for its special powers. Btit the British Press has been often itself misled and deceived. A few persons from the accident of position gain the confidence, of those who. seem to embody all practical wisdom, and who have for the moment the ear of the country. Taking the Times as an example (so distinguished for its authority as well as for its literary power), who does not remember in how many cases it has proved a bad adviser and been compelled at last to revoke its judgments and to. obtain .from better information a true knowledge of a cause. v The affairs of New Zealand have been misrepresented from two sources— those who have been anxious to promote the moral and spiritual welfare of the natives above all things, and those who have always looked upon colonies as a drain and an expense, and trusted to the omnipotence of certain principles of trade to secure custom without caring where., The conjunction of these two parties, in many respects dissimilar, has raised an. outcry against the expense of colonies, and. especially against New Zealand. The Australias are very indifferent to the financial freaks of their rulers. There is no enemy apparent, and no expense beyond volunteering and gala days. They are told colonies must defend themselves ! Australians have no great concern about the spirit, which dictates these rather sour, not to say ungrateful, theories. England does not think it worth while to reckon that her Australian trade, beside being secure from habit and connection, is one of the

largest and most profitable, growing daily with a wonderful expansion, and assuring, so long as the colonies shall be true to their origin, an open market when it may be closed in various parts of the World. These are facts which are constantly ignored, excepting in a few rather obscure publications devoted to the interests of the colonies. With New Zealand the question is far otherwise important. Besides this dislike of the colonies a very powerful interest exists at home, very jealous of them, whose centre is supposed to be at Exeter Hall. Certainly, we have nothing to say in disparagement of the motives or character or useful labours of the great religious public of England. The supercilious tone in which "Exeter Hall" is sometimes mentioned in ribald publications, and in certain that are not such, is only another proof of the power of prejudice. Notwithstanding, however, the British public of that connection is extremely suspicious, and prone to take strong views of European oppression. For various reasons they were set in motion by persons of great ecclesiastical and moral authority, who accepted the idea that the Maori possessed an original and indefeasible right in New Zealand, and tbat the colonists had no business there. We shall not pretend to discuss the truth of these propositions. Indeed, the theory of immigration to whatever country, is doubtless opposed to the exclusive rights of the aborigines. We fear, however, that populations have always pressed, the strong against the weak, and the civilised against the barbarous. This objection to the course of things in New Zealand has been made the means of prejudicing England against all active measures to coerce and subdue the native inhabitants, and thus it is that at the present moment the natives consider that the missionary institutions as well as the Imperial Government are on their side, at least in their main object, and that sooner or later the colonists will be left to themselves. It is thus that the case presents itself to the English people. Sir George Grey and others who sign this remonstrance deny its justice. It is in vain that the colonists reiterate that the Government of New Zealand has been imperial — that it has been carried on by imperial agents ; that there was no power in the colony which resisted its will — that the blunders, whatever they have been, have been made by the English Government — and that the management of affairs was never conceded until they had become involved in inextricable confusion. These are facts which are so plain and clear in the colonies that it seems to be a perverseness that the matter is not understood at home. Against this weight of prejudice the colonies have to contend both with the Government and the Parliament. The first thing to be done is, if possible, to establish the real facts of the case, and to show the condition of peril in which the colonists are left. We do not believe that the country will be abandoned. We do not imagine that those whose fortunes are lodged in the soil will desert it ; but of this we are most certain, that, if thrown entirely upon their own resources, and leffc to make war in their own way, the New Zealand conquest will be a dishonour to Great Britain ; that the hand of vengeance will fail .with tremendous force upon all who come into the power of the people, and that from the absolute necessities of the case they will have to anticipate the possibility of crime by extermination — "a short shrift and a long rope." Such are the terms in which the Press occasionally indulges in describing the proper way of treating natives who are in chronic rebellion. There is something more precious to a great nation than gold ; a loss far greater than the loss of a battle. There are passages in the history of England that every patriot would make great sacrifices to efl.ice. The mischief, however, is done, and cannot be recalled. The cruelty is perpetrated and cannot be remedied. It is not always, perhaps not commonly the case, that in national life those who commit wrong suffer for it, or that the penalty comes as a counterpart to the crime ; but assuredly the desertion of people who have gone forth under the sanction of the Crown, and total indifference to what they suffer in the day of defeat, or what they do in the day of their vengeance, will stain the honour of the British name, and be a matter of record among that numerous class of politicians who amongst nations watch with no unfriendly views the progress of British affairs. If just Government is to exist in New Zealand and the natives are not to be destroyed, it is necessary that those who hold the reins should be strong, and that law should resume its authority by making extermination no longer necessary.