Untitled

New Zealand Spectator and Cook's Strait Guardian, Volume XIX, Issue 2003, 12 October 1864, Page 3

[From the “ New Zenlmid Spectator,” Sept. 24.] The Otago Daily Times of tho 20th contains a long article on the Native Lands Act, the chiet object of which seems to be to glorify Mr. Dillon Bell as an able statesman, and to abuse Dr. F batiierston for bis purchases of land

from the natives in this Province, and notably for his purchase of the Waitotara block. On reading the article a person unacquainted with the subject would be almost disposed to believe it was written by Mr. Bell, and conceive the bard the hero of the story,” since it would be difficult, after his complete and signal failure os Native Minister in the Domett Ministry, to find any one except himself with sufficient intrepidity to proclaim Mr. Bell an able statesman. His usefulness as a hard working subordinate is generally acknowledged, but we doubt very much if by I any shuffling of the cards ho will find himself again a leading member of a New Zealand Ministry. It is, however, to Mr. Dillon Bell that wo owe the Native Lands Act of 1802, and the main objects of that Act, as is well known, were to gratify the Auckland land jobbers and to destroy whatever prospect remained of a territorial revenue for this Province. Most persons remember how, as soon as the bill was considered safe, some of the Auckland members started for the scene of action in the Lord Worsley to lose no time in securing the advantages the bill was sup posed to confer, and how’they got wrecked on their way. The bill was nearly thrown out in the Legislative Council, and an important amendment was made by that body by which some of its more objectionable features were modified. It has, however, never been brought into operation and probably never will be, as so far from being a boon to the Natives they have always regarded it with indifference, and it would most likely, if acted on, be the fruitful source of irritation and discontent between the two races from the endless disputes it would engender arising out of land quarrels. We have surely had enough of these at Taranaki and Auckland from the evil effects of which the Colony will suffer for many a day without laying the foundation for fresh land quarrels ; it is time to leave off sowing the wind to reap the whirlwind.

Dr. Featherston’s chief ’offence in the opinion of this writer is the purchase of the Waitotara block. He says “there were special objections to the purchase of Waitotara. It is little better than a second H'aitara, it is probably the purchase of a second Native War. Governor Gore Browne positively vetoed the acquisition of the Waitotara in 1860, but Sir George Grey has permitted it.” The writer who can make such statements shews a de plorable ignorance of the facts, or if he knows better is guilty of gross misrepresentation. When Governor Browne with Mr. M’Lean attended a public dinner at Wanganui in 1860 on the invitation of the settlers there, he took no small credit to himself for the part he had borne in the Waitotara purchase. We need not go into the details of that purchase. It is sufficient to state that it was taken up by Dr. Featherston where Mr. M’Lean left off and completed by him, and is admitted on all hands to be the most complete and satisfactory purchase that has been made from the Natives. . The best proof of this is that at the commencement of the last session of the General Assembly Fir. Stafford moved for a committee to inquire into the Waitotara purchase, but gave it up in despair when he found the evidence so conclusive as to the satisfactory nature of the purchase that he could make nothing of it. We will only add further that the boundaries of the block were cut by the Native owners and the reserves all marked out by them; that at this moment there are nearly three hundred Europeans engaged in forming the road through the Waitotara block without lat or hindrance from the Natives, and thatHAERE Tipene, who is chief leader of the rebels in that district, and has for along time been engaged in fighting against the troops at Taranaki, and the other chiefs of Waitotara have declared that if any of the rebel Ngatiruanuis and Taranakis attempt to create a disturbance in the Waitotara block, they will seize them and hand them over to the Queen’s Government. But we are told—“ Not content with this Dr. Featherston is purchasing land right and left in defiance of the Native Lands Act. The announcement with which he closed the Wellington Provincial Council at the termination of its last session was that he had every hope of obtaining land in large quantities from the Natives--at a merely nominal price is, of course, understood.” We do not see how these purchases can be in defiance of an Act that is not in operation, but we assert without fear of contradiction that these recent purchases, (we allude more particularly to the Manawatu block), are the best proofs that can be given at once of the confidence and goodwill of the Natives and of our security from Native disturbances in. this Province. The best proof that the Natives are satisfied is that they are anxious to offer fresh blocks for sale,while the purchase money, £12,000, of the Manawatu block consisting of 250,000 acres which was paid in one sum, is rather more than was given for the land at Otago, where six million acres were purchased by the Government from the natives in 1853 for the sum of tioo thousand pounds and the money paid in two instalments of £lOOO each in two years. This kind of argument comes with a very bad grace from Otago, now that that Province is involved and in difficulties, the only escape from which lies in the integrity of her territorial revenue, instead of its being offered up a holocaust to satisfy the demands of the Waikato waranti the Auckland contractors. Nor are we aware that any particular sympathy for the Natives has been shown by the Executive of the Otago Province, since it required some active interference by the Ministry a few years back to preserve for the benefit of the Natives some reserves that had become valuable there, and which but for this interference would have been diverted from their legitimate objects and appropriated to public purposes.