PARLIAMENTARY INTELLIGENCE.

Nelson Examiner and New Zealand Chronicle, Volume IV, Issue 175, 12 July 1845, Page 74

PARLIAMENTARY INTELLIGENCE.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Makch 11.

Mr. Soames moved for copies of all correspondence between the Colonial Office and the Governor of New Zealand respecting the issue of debentures and the rendering them a legal tender in that colony, the taxes proposed in the Legislative Council, the outrages recently committed by the natives in the Bay of Islands, and a proclamation issued by the Governor of New Zealand allowing the sale of land by the natives at a less price than that fixed by the act of sth and 6th Victoria, c. 36.

Mr. Aglionby seconded the motion, and after observing that he did not wish on that occasion to raise a New Zealand debate, or open the whole question between the New Zealand Company and the Colonial Department, proceeded to ask whether the Government was aware that in that colony inconvertible paper-money had been made by the Governor a legal tender for sums as low as 25., and whether the Governor had previously received authority by warrant from the Colonial Department to issue such debentures to the amount of £15,000 ? He also wished to know whether it was true, that in a colony which was to flourish by its agriculture, a tax of 10s. had been levied on every sheep imported, and a similar tax on every dog imported to herd them — what the House thought of a Governor who placed a tax of £1 on every house in which more than three rooms were inhabited, and whether the Governor had vindicated the character of this country by protecting the whites against the outrages of the natives ? Nine of our countrymen had been murdered in cold blood. Had the Governor made inquiry into the circumstances of that massacre ? or had he, as was reported, gone to the murderers' tribe and declared himself satisfied? He also wanted to know in what manner the honour of the British flag had been vindicated after it had been cut down, and our men and women had been grievously insulted. He then made several inquiries

respecting the sale of land in New Zealand, and observed, that when he got an answer to those inquiries, he should bring forward a distinct motion on the subject, and should call for further information. There was now 16,000 or 17,000 white inhabitants in New Zealand, they were all in deep distress, and they all attributed it to the measures adopted by the local Government. Mr. Hope protested against the course pursued by Mr. Aglionby. He knewj a fortnight ago that all the information for which he now moved was at any momt nt at his command, and yet he made a speec h, as if that information would be withbe d. He had also said that he would not raise the New Zealand question, but, at the sairife time he suggested that the Government had been guilty of a breach of faith towards the New Zealand Company. Why did he rot come boldly forward, make his charge, aid endeavour to substantiate it? It had been. «stated out of doors that the New Zealand Company intended to proceed by impeachment against Lord Stanley for his misconduct as head of the Colonial Department, and that Lord Stanley had escaped frc >m that house in order that he might not be called upon to answer those charges ; aid now Mr. Aglionby, acting on the bit by bit system, gave notice that he woutd make a charge on a future day against the noble lord, when he brought forward a futire motion. After some further comments on this mode of proceeding, Mr. Hope proceeded to answer the questions which Mr. Aglionby had put to him. The Government had disapproved of the debentures issued by the Governor, and they had been withdrawn in consequence. He could not state whether Mr. Aglionby's information respecting the taxes imposed in New Zt aland was correct or not, inasmuch as the Government, owing to some accident, had been an unusually long time without int ;1ligence from that colony. But with respect to the outrages at the Bay of Inlands, he had received accounts from New Soi th Wales, which showed that troops had been sent for to Sydney in order to repress the m. He denied that the Governor had not sui ficiently vindicated the honour of the British flag, and also that he had made inquiry respecting some former outrages only from the murderers themselves. On the contrary, the Governor had made inquiry of those w io complained of the outrages, and was now exposed to much obloquy from them, 1 ecause he would not listen to the suggestions of their hostile feeling. On the other subjects of interrogation he had no information to communicate. ; Mr. C. Buller observed that the hon. Secretary had been very angry about matters which were not before the House, and very indifferent about those which were under discussion. He assured Mr. Hope that he should have an opportunity soon of defending his principal, Lord Stanley, if he desired it ; for the report of the Committee on New Zealand should not be allowed to sleep. They were not, however, to be taunted if they demanded a preliminary inquiry into some circumstances before they brought forward that motion. If Mr. Hope had been so ready to produce information — which, however, he had not to give in five out of six points on which he had been questioned — why had he not placed it on the table a fortnight ago ? The fact was, that this question of New Zealand was a sample of the government of all our colonies, from the imbecility of the Governor up to the total ignorance of the Colonial Department. In former times it was held that Englishmen carried their rights with them to whatever quarter of the globe they went ; and it was on that principle they had founded those glorious colonies which now formed the most flourishing portion of the new world. But that principle had been abrogated ever since the country had possessed conquered colonies and convict colonies. How was New Zealand governed ? There was nothing like representation there. The Government \ 'as a pure despotism. The Governor and the Council made its laws, and the Council consisted of three Government officers and of three nominees of the Governor. So that the Governor had the power of nominating his council, and of dismissing them wt en, they did not act according to his will and pleasure. He then proceeded to show ti lat Governor Fitzßoy was not only incompetent, but mischievously and dangerouily incompetent to be intrusted with the {[overnment of a nascent colony. He entei ed into a severe criticism upon every action of Captain Fitzßoy during his administrat on of the affairs of New Zealand, and conchu led it by stating that the English Governnn >nt had no right to trust the destinies eithei of the Europeans or of the natives to sue i a man. The Government ought to send out at once a keeper and a successor to Capt »in Fitzroy. They ought to recall him, not ts a

punishment, but as the only means of safety to| a colony which never could be safe so lofag as it was intrusted to so foolish and incompetent a person. Colonel Rice Trevor rose to vindicate his absent relative, Captain Fitzßoy. The attack which had been made upon him could not reach him till five months from this time, and no defence could be made for him till five months more. As no recent accounts had been received from Captain Fitzßoy, he must labour under these heavy charges till the next session of Parliament, for none of his friends had sufficient information on which to undertake his defence. He trusted, however, that the house would not consider these charges proved until they were substantiated by evidence. Colonel Wood protested against the two epithets which Mr. C. Buller had applied to Captain Fitzßoy, and trusted that in his cooler moments he would retract the terms " foolish and incompetent" He was sure that when information was received from New Zealand it would give a very different complexion to these transactions.

Sir W. James also complained of the violent and indecorous language which Mr. Buller had applied to his absent relative, who was the very soul of honour and chivalry. He trusted that the country would recollect that all these charges were made against an absent man on imperfect information.

After a few observations from Commodore Napier,

Sir R. Peel regretted that Mr. Aglionby, who seconded, had not abstained, like Mr. Somes, who brought forward this motion, from all observations upon it. His friend Mr. Hope would have readily given them all the information in his power, and if they were going to impeach the conduct of Captain Fitzßoy, it would have been as well had they waited till they had obtained the papers which they called for. He conceived that great injustice had been done, both to his noble colleague (Lord Stanley) and to Captain Fitzßoy, in the comments which had been made that evening on the conduct of both. He admitted that Mr. C. Buller had a right to call on the Government to send out a successor to Captain Fitzßoy, but he thought he had no right to use the language which he had done, when he said that they ought also to send out a keeper for him. The New Zealand Company had not, indeed, appointed Captain Fitzßoy ; it had approved his appointment, and, as a proof of it, he read a letter which that Company had addressed to Lord Stanley, through their secretary (Mr. Ward). He then recapitulated the circumstances of the case, as they had been stated before by the Under- Secretary for the Colonies, and expressed a hope that Mr. Aglionby would bring forward the charges which he had threatened in a distinct shape as soon as possible. Lord Howick rose to defend Mr. C. Buller. He imputed no blame to the motives of Captain Fitzßoy, but he had a right, and so had Mr. Buller, to condemn the judgment of that officer. Mr. Mangles observed, that when the New Zealand Company wrote to Lord Stanley the letter which Sir Robert Peel had just read, they did uot know that Captain Fitzßoy, with whom they were in communication, had in his pocket a letter from Lord Stanley, explaining away the contract which had formerly been made between the Company and the Government. If the New Zealand Compauy had known of that letter, they would have thrown up 'their connexion with New Zealand at once, and would have been content to lose the money which they had already embarked in their attempt to colonise that island. Constituted as the New Zealand Company was, it could not bring an action against the -Crown for the restitution of its rights; but it had done all that was in its power — it had appealed on the subject to a committee of the House of Commons, which had given a verdict on every point in their favour. But Lord Stanley had set that verdict aside ; and the New Zealand Company would appeal on a future occasion to the House itself, in behalf of men who believed themselves to be deeply robbed by the proceedings of the Colonb! Office.

ISir R. Inglis was proud to call himself a friend of Captain Eitzßoy, and rose to defend his character from unjust imputations cast upon it in the course of this debate. He had never read a more one-sided report than that on New Zealand, and he could give but little credit to the conclusions at which it had arrived. He took the same view of this question as her Majesty's Government, and, had a division been called for, he would certainly have voted in its favour.

The motion was then agreed to, after some alteration had been made in the terms of it by Mi-. Hope, who would not admit that Lord Stanley had made any agreement with the New Zealand Company on the 12th of May, 1843. On that point there was considerable sparring between Mr. C. Buller and Mr. Aglionby, on the one side, and Mr. Hope on the Other; but a compromise was ultimately accomplished, which satisfied all parties.