THE NEW ZEALAND WAR.

Taranaki Herald, Volume IX, Issue 445, 9 February 1861, Page 4

THE NEW ZEALAND WAR.

[From the Times.]

The mail from New Zealand has brought us a voluminous collection of documents on the controversy which is disturbing the peace of that flourishing settlement, and threatening to convert one of our happiest colonies into a scene of discord and war. We wish we could say that the evidence we have received was decisive of the merits of the question. It is a matter on which Englishmen ought to be well informed, and it would give us genuine sa tisfaction to place the whole truth before the public without fear or favor. Unfortunately, the allegations are so conflicting, and the authorities so evenly balanced, that we can only adopt a theory from one page to find it upset by the next ; and the contest extends with a singular identity of character even to our correspondence at home. The two parties who divide opinion in the colony are well represented in England. Piofessor Browne writes to us one day from Cambridge in defence of his brother, tpe Governor, and Colonel Hadfield replies by the following post in defence of his brother, the Archdeacon. In this cloud and conflict of testimony and argument we can discern the features of the quarrel, but not its merits. We can state the question, but not resolve it. One point only appears to us to be clear, and that is, that whether the recent proceedings of the colonial government are justifiable or otherwise, its general policy is that which must inevitably prevail.

j As the reader is aware, the dispute between the ! Government of New Zealand and the natives of the province is a dispute purely agrarian in its nature. The European settlers wanted more land, and the Government entered into negotiations for tne purchase of a " block" of country desirably situated from its native owner. When the bargain was so far completed that the authorities began to survey the estate, another native, who had asserted his title to the land in question as overruling that of the vendor, interfered with the surveying party, and so conducted himself as to lead to a quarrel, and at length to war. On behalf of this man, Wiremu Kingi, or King William, by name, it is alleged that he is, in reality, one of our most" approved friends and allies ; that his claim to the land was really so sound as to entitle him to forbid the sale ; that the survey was an equivalent act in native eyes to that of taking possession, and that the present state of the quarrel is due to the authorities, who resorted precipitately to arms, instead of submitting the question to such arbitration as might pacifically decide it. On the side of the Government it is urged that the hnd was required for occupation ; that it was purchased at a fair price from the ostensible proprietor, whose ownership was recognised according to the best principles of procedure, and that it became absolutely necessary, in consequence of Wiremu Kingi's behaviour, either to defend our rights by force, or see them superseded in such a fashion at would subvert our authority altogether. To say nothing of the other points, it is obviously impossible for us, on this side of the globe, to decide a question so intricate as that of the land tenure in New Zealand. We can only observe that the charge against the Colonial Government is certainly not, at first sight, a heavy one. We have not been guilty of extortion or oppression. We have not seized upon the property of others by the mere rule of might. We intended to make an honest bargain, and the worst that can be said is, that we bought the land of the wrong man. We were ready to pay somebody or other a fair price for it, and it is to be presumed that we should look out, with the natural instinct of purchasers, foi the best title procurable. Although, therefore, it is possible, as we do not deny, that Wiremu Kingi may be an ill-used man, we cannot see that the policy of the Government is exposed to any serious reprobation at this point of the transaction. Whether we have been premature or not in our resort to force, is a question equally complicated ; but, as Governor Browne is blamed by one party for his tardiness, it would perhaps be hard to refuse him the credit of probable impartiality. The truth of the matter is, however, and here all the obscurity of the case is suddenly dispelled, that this dispute with Wiremu Kingi is but the expression is but the expression of a controversy by which the colony has been long divided. Something like it has been experienced in most settlements, but circumstances have conspired to give the question a peculiar prominence in the case of New Zealand. There is a native population there, and a British population ; the latter, strange to say, outnumbering the former in the aggregate by some 1 5,000 souls. Each of these classes has its peculiar interests, which, however they may be reconciled in the end, are unhappily found to clash for the present. The settlers increase rapidly, as well they may, for there is not in the British Empire a spot more attractive to the emigrant. As they encroach upon the native race in relative numbers, it is a necessary consequence that they should encroach in occupation of territory ; in other words, that they should want more and more land, to the continual extension of the British pale. The natives are acute enough to discern the tendency of events, and patriotic enough to withstand it. Their chiefb are indisposed to part with any more of their lands, and the veto which Wiremu Kingi claimed in the case before us was exercised, it is said, in pursuance of this general policy. So far there is nothing remarkable in the

matter, excepting, perhaps, the unusual intelligence and tenacity displayed by the natives. What gives the case its peculiarity is, that the native side of the question has been energetically adopted by authorities of high and deserved influence among the British themselves. Dr Selwyn, the Bishop of New Zealand, and Archdeacon iladfield, his zealous coadjutor, have constituted themselves the advocates of native rights, and with the support of a party in the colony, have formally protested against the policy of Government, and justified the claims of the now insurgent chieftain. In these proceedings they have acted without reserve, and appear to have candidly avowed their conviction that the Colony of New Zealand is, by the very terms of the original settlement, an institution designed not for the advantage or benefit of Englishmen, but, in its primary object, for the protection of the natives against the encroachments of the settlers on their territory. Such, as we understand the case, is the theory avowed by the ecclesiastical authorities of the province, and according to this theory it is not to be denied that the Colonial Government has now placed itself in the wrong. This, however, is precisely the point on which we venture to think that the policy of the empire admits of little question.

We do not believe that the principle here advanced can ever be maintaiiied. It might perhaps have heen contemplated at the foundation of the colony, but it could never, in the nature of things, be enforced as time rolled on. We can readily comprehend the hopes and aspirations of such a man as Bishop Selwyn. He looks forward to ihe conversion and civilization of an intelligent and interesting race, capable of producing a Christian commonwealth on their native territories. He does not wish to see this vision disturbed by inroads of hard -headed emigrants, flushed with successful enterprise, and encroaching by superior vigour on the disinherited Maories. So he boldly takes his stand, and having, as he believes, a really strong case in Wiremu Kingi's claim, he pushes it to actual conflict with the Government of the colony. We again confess our inability to decide upon the merits of the particular question, but we have no such hesitation on the question of general policy. We say distinctly that the native-ascend-ancy theory cannot stand. It may have been designed, but it cannot be upheld. If the interests of the rival population cannot be reconciled, those of the natives must give way. The result, whether consistent with justice or not, is simply inevitable. The whole power of the Imperial Government would hardly suffice to avert it. To suppose that an Anglo-Saxon population actually established, actually out -numbering the savages on its border, receiving constant accessions of strength, and sure of resolute support from the kindred colonies of Australia — to suppose that this people can be cribbed and bound to satisfy the views of a sentimental philanthropy, is a pure absuidity. Unless the New Zealand settlers are to be deported in a body, and their farms turned once more into hunting grounds, the superior race will infallibly prevail. They will want more land, and they will have it. It is fortunate for the natives that they possess such stuidv friends, and every body in this country would wish that they may be considerately dealt with ; but the laws of nature must prevail, and those laws forbid the preponderance of a Maori race when confronted with the energies inherent in Anglo-Saxon blood.