Poverty Bay Herald. PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. GISBORNE, FRIDAY, AUGUST 24, 1923. THE CONFISCATED LANDS AGAIN.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XLIX, Issue 16212, 24 August 1923, Page 4

Poverty Bay Herald. PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. GISBORNE, FRIDAY, AUGUST 24, 1923. THE CONFISCATED LANDS AGAIN.

We really had thought that the last had been heard of the question of the confiscated lands. But it seems not. A few days ago a deputation waited upon the Minister for Native) Affairs to apply for a Commission to ho set up to re-open the wholoj question of the confiscations of native land about the year 1866. This ig fifty-seven years ago. Mr. Ngata. introduced the deputation. Seventy Maori chiefs from the Bay of Plenty, the Waikato, and Taranaki were in attendance and there was also a formidable representation of the bar. The Hon. Sir Maui Pomaro, Mr. H. W. Urn, M'.P., and the Hon. Wi Rikihana,' M.L.C., also attended. Mr. Skerrctt, K.C., made the claim for the natives. He elaborated the data of lands taken and the tribes he appeared for who were replanted by the deputation. It is not likely that any of the natives who waited upon Mr. Coates could have any knowledge as to the Maori war except what they had obtained by tradition handed down to them. A few of the older men, possibly as youths at the time of the war, might have some local first-hand knowledge. The Europeans present would be in much the same position as the Maoris except that they might have had access to the older literature of the period 1866 to 1870 which is not much read, if . at all, at thef present day. Mr. Skerrett," so far as lie showed liis hand at the interview; seemed to rely upon certain “conditions imposed by the /Imperial authorities” as not having been properly observed by the New Zealand Government of that day, also that the confiscations were made without discrimination, and that the land of loyal natives equally with those who were disloyal, had been taken. He also cited a report of a Parliamentary Committee in 1866 which bo said had reported that, in the case of the Opotiki and Whakatane tribes that half of them had been friem!ly or neutral. Mr. Smith, as counsel for the Taranaki, Waikato, and Tauranga natives, challenged the. confiscations as a whole and quoted the late Sir Billon Bell and Sir Robert Stout as having held strongly that the natives had been ill-nsed in respect of the-con-fiscations. Mr. Ngata, was more guarded. He thought that the grievance as to these confiscations made it difficult to induce the natives to promote wholeheartedly reforms which were essential to* the welfare of the future race. Under tljesei circumstances it is perhaps as well to remind ourselves what the state’ of Now Zealand was in 1863. In 1857 the Waikato tribes sell up a. native king. Wi Tamihana was the king-maker, and Potatau the. king. The intention of the leaders’ of the king movement was to unite the Maoris ng tribes, so that the people should become one like the nakelias—'a. form of home rule. In 1861 Governor Sir Thomas Gore Browne'snpported by a large party in the colony dotermibed to put down, by force of aims if necessary, the king movement. Later be held it, to bo necessary. The Stafford Ministry which supported ibis policy resigned after being defeated on their native policy by one vote. Sir Thomas Gore Browne was removed and replaced by Sir George Grey. The unfortunate manifesto of Governor Browne’s intern tfpn to put down the king, movement bv force was withdrawn. A general native rising was averted for a time, the difficulty being limited to Taranaki, but Mr. Gisborne says “the Taranaki truce came to a bad end, and the war, like some incurable and malignant growth, took firmer bold of the system, and outspread itself more and more.” Them the natives made recognitioni of the king movement, the only condition upon which they would be! reconciled. Mr. Gisborne, in his history, writes : —“They looked upon it (the king movement) as the charter of their lands and their freedom/ and they insisted on its official recognition as an essential condition of peace.” In 1862 the responsibility for native affairs bad not been transferred to the Colonial Ministers. Sir William Fox proposed it, but lie was defeated, The; casting vote of the Speaker debated the Government! on the question. Meanwhile the Home Government had authorised thoi transfer. After tin's it is difficult to get clear light. Murders on the one side and seizures of land and making of roads on the other led to the war in the Wat kato, which spread until the whole central interior was involved in war. .This became racial land while' no 'doubt : individual natives and sections of native tribes, owing .to the influence of the missionaries or the Governor, remained loyal, the natives its tribes, combined under their king, were lighting to drive the Europeans out- of the North Island. The individual rights of natives to land in those days and for some time after were hardly recognised. The chiefs held the lands for the people. They knew nothing about individual titles. .They bad to care for their people. The creation of an estate or interest of land iu individual natives did not spring from tli6 Maoris at all. It was the invent ioif of the*' European, partly in loyalty to the treaty of Waitaiigi, but also as enabling the acquirement of native land by the Crown ' for purposes of settlement. Individual native ownership was almost unknown prior to the war. Native lands wemjield by right of Occupation! by the strongest tribes. King Potatau or even later old Takamoana Karaitiana or Renata. Kawepp, well known in Hawke’s Bay, would have made very short work of any individual natives belonging to their tribes claiming rights apart from tile tribe. The seventy chiefs that faced Mr. Coates, would Lave looked ' very small if they had been old enough to make tho claims which they put forward through their lawyers to Mr. Coates, to (he leader of the king movement.' The condition tho wan left in its trail was bad. This is how it is 'described.: “The colony majf be said to have been then, bleeding at every pore; tedldnipation was-’stopped ; capital was decreasing; labor was. leaving for-other countries; industry-in the' North Island, was paralysed and-the ..public credit of ,t.he ’.wb'cle. .celcuiy : was

strained.” "'"Tt is difficult to-day to understand what that strain was in thosei days. . No isolated settlers knew the day when-,'they, might not be attacked and cruelly murdered. The danger in 1863 extended to Auckland itself, which, emptied ojfall its able)bodied) men who were*.on duty, was.defendecU.by the old Hum‘and boys. Tho'only 1 way to punish tile natives was '/through their lands. That way was lalcen. We do :not-'.under-stand >-Mr. Slceijett’s claim ' that /"confiscation was carried out in violation of conditions laid •down by tho lloni/e; Government. ,No doubt the Home’Government, vHvhich treated the suffering young settlement exceedingly . badlyat .that time, suggested certain' modifications? in the proposals ■of Ministers •’ through '/the Secretary of State, which appear-to liaVe been adopted. But the confiscation was carried out by virtue of a statute.passed by .the’ Colonial Legislature, which could have been disallowed at' Home, but was left to its operations; No one would advocate the perpetuation of any injustice but when a. native race, by those who lend it and' speak for it, set up a king in an English dependency, and insist as the price of peace upon the recognition of their king and'failing in that, commit outrages according to their methods of warfare, the results of. their action, be they good or bad, must attach to the whole people they act for. It is not possible to go further in reservations than was done at the eoncl'usion of the war when facts were known and evidence available. Even then it would lie Only possible to deal with individuals and sections of tribes on. grounds of mercy rather than of right. In every war there must be many persons who suffer because of the acts ol others who are leaders with which they are not in sympathy. The natives for fifty years have had \ immunities from toll while the European population lias expended immense sums of money in railways and roads and given their labor to add enormously to the value of the lands Which the natives have been allowed to retain. Commissions have sat before with no result when facts could be made' clear. To grant a Commission now would be to put upon trial the actors in England and New Zealand in the tragedies of 1866-1870, who for the most part are dead. With deference to Mr. Ngata it. would, in our opinion, do more to unsettle the native mind and to put them off from taking their fair share in the common battle of life as sellers on equal terms with the European than could any disatisfaction at present ruling as to unexplored attempts upon the credulity of good nature of the Minister and the Palceha. Parliament.

PUBLIC WORKS

Viewed from^t he local standpoint, the' Public Works Statement is by no means a satisfying document. Gisborne still remains the Cinderella, district of the Dominion, and very little is being done to remove its isolation and to promote its development. The Minister’s justification of the policy of concentration is supported by the results attained, but where we join issue with him is in bis classification of the works of ~ greatest urgency. Why it should be necessary to vote another £257,000 to cany the North Auckland railway still ''further north, whilst only £150,000 is appropriated for the Napier-Gisborne line, and that for work outside the Gisborne district, we fail utterly to understand. It is the more incomprehensible because of the distinct pledge given by the Hon. Mr. Coates four years ago that when tho North of Auckland rajhvay was' connected up men and plant would l be brought to this district and a vigorous effort would be made to connect Gisberne with tile railway- system of the Dominion. The Minister may .consider that by pushing on the lines through the Bay of Plenty and northward from Napier he is fulfilling his pledge and steadily achieving the object aimed at, hut it would' be much more satisfactoxy to .the people of this district to have visible evidence of his good intentions, and no reason has been adduced why the work of linking up could not be as well and economically performed from Gisborne outwards as from Napier outwards, thus giving Gisborne the benefit .of development of the intervening country as the work proceeds, as well as its just share in "the expenditure of the Public Works fund. On the Gisborne southward section there is some heavy tunnelling, which will take sever a', ' years, to execute, and unless- an early start is made with this work, upon which only a comparatively small amount of labor can be employed, there is bound to be delay in the 1 ultimate completion of the line. Gisborne’s interests in the matter of railway extension seem to have been completely ignored, and the Minister’s pledge ,to 1 the people of this district forgotten. As regards reading, the Minister seems to have made adequate provision for the completion of metalling of the GisborneWairoa road during the ensuing summer, and fair allocations have been made for the improvement of the East Coast highway. These votes, however, form no adequate compensation for the neglect that the district has long been subject 'to iu respect to the absence of railway facilities —an injustice that the Hon. Minister seems to be in no hurry to remove. THE DEBENTURE TAXATION. When we wrote a few days ago as to the increase of the' debenture tax upon debentures issued by local bodies and companies it was considered that tho lax although, not retrospective as to accrued income, of. past issues would apply to income hereafter to accrue from such issues. Mr. Massey has cleared the matter up. When challenged on the point he said : “I say now that it is not intended to be retrospective. It will not apply' to- the debentures issued by companies or local bodies up to the passing of the Bill itself. I do not think it wpuld bo quite fair to attempt it, and 1 have no intention of doing so.” The New Zealand Times after Mr. Massey’s clear statement writes : “Owing to misunderstanding the higher tax on debentures has been largely regarded as retrospective. But this is not the case. All debentures existing will continue to pay the old rate: of taxation.’’ No doubt' tho draftsman will see that any obscurity if any in the Bill as introduced upon this point is removed so that the Government’s intention may be carried out. 1