Hawke's Bay Herald. TUESDAY, AUGUST 12, 1879. THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL AND MAORI PRISONERS.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXI, Issue 5458, 12 August 1879, Page 2

Hawke's Bay Herald. TUESDAY, AUGUST 12, 1879. THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL AND MAORI PRISONERS.

Parties got singularly mixed on the debato on the Peace Preservation Bill. The measure sought to place considerable- and almost arbitrary power in the hands of tho Ministry in dealing with the political ploughmen in Taranaki; but that the Bill was a wise one may be inferred from the fact that Major Atkinson, who is certainly qualified to speak with authority on the subject, gave it his warm and unhesitating support. Capfc. Russell also for once sank party prejudices, and unexpectedly showed his confidence in the Ministry by arguing in favor of placing this great power in their hands. Are we to accept thiy change of front as an indication of tho lion, and gallant gentleman's intention to poscTbeforo the Napier electorate as an " independent " candidate i Wo can hardly credit him with such a sudden and complete conversion, but we accept his conduct on this occasion us showing that he is not so lacking in faith in the Ministry as wo had concluded. Seriously speaking, wo Avoroglad to see our member rising to tho occasion, and sinking his party feelings to join in passing a measure which lie believed to be necessary in the interests of the colony. His independent action was creditable to him, lor, although Sir William Fox and tho other leaders of the Opposition, with the exception of Major Atkinson, did their utmost to defeat the Bill, Captain liusscll did not hesitate to avow his belief in its necessity, and, not content to remain a mere passive spectator, lent what active aid ho could towards making it the law. We gather from our Parliamentary report that Sir William L (1 ox did not press for a division, and in so doing he showed that discretion which is commonly said to be the better part of valor. The Bill was passed by tho House of Representatives, but came to grief in the Legislative Council, where it was defeated by more than two votes to one. A glance at the division list shows that it was not a device of the Opposition to score a mean victory over the Ministry, for Mr P. Buckley, one of tho warmest Ministerial supporters in the Council, voted with i the majority, and the three native members went to the lobby with him. while Mr Baillie, who if not a very decided opponent has a leaning towards the other side, yoted with Colonel

Whitmoro. It is evident that the BiU was hob regarded from a party point of view-, and >vag i-bjected on its merits. We rcgreb tliat the Council proved obstructive in this matter. The proposals of the Government were no doubt strong, but they were perfectly justifiable under the cireumstaneesi Tii effect they would have given the Ministry power to suspend the Habeas Corpus Act j.n th.c disaffected districts. They cculd thus Juvve takoii the ploughmen aS prisoners having no right of trial, who would' have been held in custody as long as the interests of tho colony appeared to demand extreme measures. Ample notice wouldj however, have been given to the native's; and if they had then chosen to assert a right to tho Confiscated land by ploughing or taking forcible possession Of any settler's m'opcrfcyj they tvoilld have known estielly what risk they were r uuning. If it had been proposed to make the Bill retrospective we could have understood the damdr about it being * impdnsfcijiitfcidiia]," but it merely proposed to do in Now. Zealand what has several times in the last century been done in Ireland; and is strictly in accordance with constitutional precedent; The existing law lias protect to be insufficiently stringent to deter the natives from ploughing, and it was proposed to pass a more strict measure to secure to the Europeans that immunity from the depredations of the Maoris which they have a right to demand at the hands of the Government* The opposition df Sir 'William fox to the Bill is explicable on the ground that, with a view to tho possible accession to power of his party- he was throwing out a bait to catth the Maori vote; but that explanation cannot apply -with any force to tho Legislative Councillors who secured its rejection, and we are at a loss to find an adequate reasdn why so many member's of k that Chamber voted against it. Apart from tho character of the bill there is a curious feature of the debate deserving of notice. . "When Sir William Fox made his onslaught on the native policy of the Ministry he ascribed the present difficulty to the fact that Ministers had acted without reference to promises made by Sir Donald M-'Loan to the natives, and he labored to show that these promises must have been known to the Native Minister. The 'Government, in their defence, averred their total ignorance of any such promises until they wore a short time previously discovered hidden away in the Taranaki Land Office. However, it appeared to be admitted on all hands that these alleged promises were made, and a paper laid on the table of the HoUse gave . details of the exact oilers made by Sir Donald M'Lean. Major Atkinson does noc in so many words deny the truth of the return, but he pooh-poohs it as an explanation of the Taranaki difficulties and, what is more, takes very nearly the identical platform on which Sir George Grey and Mr Sheehan have taken their stand. If the telegraphic report be correct ho expressly stated that " There were two classes of Europeans — one inclined to to believe the natives were right, and the other who wanted to make use of them in order to secure their lands The difficulty had been occasioned by interested parties who desired to get the lands and sell them to Europeans." Coming from a gentleman who, although professedly one of the leaders of the Opposition, has by his conduct during the disturbances in his district gained the respect of every true colonist, this testimony is a strong confirmation of the statements of Ministers, and goes far to explain the failure of their native policy. During the hist six mouths Major Atkinson has done his best to prove himself a colonist first and a politician afterwards, and his word is entitled to ten times more consideration than the prejudiced utterances of a Fox or a Sutton. This little incident of Saturday's debate proves that even the leaders of the Opposition are far from united. The conduct of Major Atkinson and Captain .Russell in showing that they were prepared to sink personal or political differences when the good of the colony demanded united action will raise them in the estimation of the country. We believe that both of them acted from disinterested motives, and accord to them that which we believe to be their just due. Though politically we find ourselves in opposition to Captain Russell we should be sorry to hear it even hinted that he was making a bid for popularity. The best proof of the honesty of his unusual support of the Ministry may be found by a glance at the Napier electoral roll. The Maoris would not under any circumstances have been likely to support him in any numbers, but he has not hesitated to make a speech which will secure for him their hearty and united opposition.