PATEA COUNTY MAIL PUBLISHED Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday. SATURDAY, AUGUST, 14, 1880. TO BE, OR NOT TO BE?

Patea Mail, 14 August 1880, Page 2

PATEA COUNTY MAIL PUBLISHED Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday. SATURDAY, AUGUST, 14, 1880. TO BE, OR NOT TO BE ?

What is the proportion of acres which ought to be reserved to every man, woman, and child of the native race in any district ? The W r est Coast Commissioners say the law has long laid down the principle that no reserves for natives should bo considered sufficient unless equal to an aggregate of not less than 50 acres for each native, young and old. The Commissioners quote that general authority—“ the law long laid down”— as being an answer to any objections against the amounts they have recommended for native reserves “in the aggregate.” Now the Commissioners

have put themselves in a cleft stick. For does it not come to this, that if the Commissioners propose to reserve more than this proportion, they are doing u what the law has long laid down” as being more than natives require ? The native population on the West Coast is estimated to be under 3,000. That was the number some years ago, and must be much less now. But taking them at 3.000 all told, and allowing 50 acres to each, they would be adequately provided for with a total of 150,000 acres. What the Commissioners actually propose is to increase the present reserves to 263.000 acres. That is to say, they affirm that the law has long laid down a standard of 50 acres for each individual, and to show their respect for what “ the law has long laid down,” they propose to double the allowance. If we take the actual population at about 2,600, the Commissioners will be awarding quite 100 acres per head. Is not this setting aside the very principle and proportion which the Commissioners quote as justifying what they arc doing ? The law says 50 acres per head of reserves ; the Commissioners say 100. Really, gentlemen, this thing is a deliberate injustice to the colony in whom the right to this land is vested.

The Commissioners also say the confiscation must be respected. That confiscation gave ns the seaboard of the West Coast. These Koyal Commissioners now take our property, and give back to rebel natives, not what il the law has long laid down” as being fair and necessary, but double that amount. Gentlemen, if your right to do this is not in the law, it is contrary to the law; and being contrary, you arc dealing with public property in a manner which no person would tolerate if applied to his own affairs. The worst feature of this had case is that the Commissioners forced the hands of Parliament by making public these recommendations before Parliament met, in order that it might become impossible for Parliament to adopt any independent plan. These Commissioners have produced throe reports, all interesting, and valuable in parts; but they have also done much more harm than good by arrogating to themselves the functions of a despotic Sovereign. For this thing they ought to be impeached.