THE Thames Advertiser. THURSDAY, JULY 24,1878.

Thames Advertiser, Volume XI, Issue 2985, 25 July 1878, Page 2

THE Thames Advertiser. THURSDAY, JULY 24,1878.

The Hon. Hoani Nahe, through his amanuensis Reihana Poto, has told us in the unmistakeable terms, that the Government would be acting very ungraciously if they atrempted to condemn his action in connection with the opposition to Te Aroha. He evidently does not fear a Cabinet rap over the knuckles for the awkward position in which he had placed Ministers anxious to keep faith with the Thames people, and to open up without loss of time blocks of land for settlement. Hoani Nahe asks (through Reihana) who set up Sir George Grey as head of the Government, and who set up Mr Sheehan as Native Minister? The reply given is that Hoani Nahe's vote ousted the Atkinson Ministry, and this consideration alone is sufficient to atone for any irregularity on the part of an hon. member who sets himself up to oppose the Government Land Purchase Agent and acquire for others a larger interest in certain lands than the Court, after careful investigation, felt itself at liberty to award. Reihana's defence is:—" Perhaps there are some friends who recollect the voting in the House-39 on one side, and 39 on the other—the result being that the present Government took office. If Hoani Nahe had been inclined to vacillate, or to act dishonourably, he would either have remained outside the House, or he would have gone over to the other side. If he had acted in either of the ways mentioned, those persons, who are now being advised by the news-

papers to turn round upon and eject the honourable member from office, would not have attained the positions which they now occupy. He has sent a telegram to the Government to explain the position of affairs. He will not go the Parliament, even although it should be opened, but will wait for the answer of the Government as to the wish of the general public of both races on the subject. It may be that ho also wants them to express definitely their own ideas regarding his conduct, so that he may make up his mind how to act in the event of the Government being attacked by the Opposition during the coming session." Now, we are not aware that any newspaper recommended the ejection of Hoani Nahe from the Ministry in consequence of his action. All that was done was to point out the auomalous position he had placed himself in by his appearance as the advocate of a sub-section opposed to the ruling of the Native Land Court. It was not unreasonable to expect that Ministers f| would point this out to him, and recommend him to hand over the advocacy to another, not connected with the Government. But the argument put forward by Eeihana is that Government would not be so ungrateful as to interfere, and in this he appears to be right. The threat contained in the concluding sentence of the extract quoted above is altogether unnecessary. Hoani Nahe has obtained too firm a footing as the righthand supporter of thehon. the Native Minister, and a firm friend of the Premie/s, to render such a menace necessary under the circumstances. The sentence means that unless he is to be received with open arms on his return to Wellington he will join the ranks of the Opposition, and throw over his chosen Mends, the Ministry. No wider, therefore, that the hon.the Native Minister replies as follows to a communication from Hoani Nahe on the subject:—"l must apologise for not sooner answering your telegram about the Land Court at Hauraki. You perhaps know that I have received a great number of telegrams complaining of the action taken by you and Taipari in contending with the Government about Te Aroha. The only ones I have answered are those which I have received from Europeans, and I have replied to the effect that both you and Taipari were at liberty to act as you thought fit in the matter. Although you are a member of the Government, it is quite correct for you to fight for and protect the lands of your people, even though the Governmerit should be losers through the action taken by you. We do not blame you in the least, as we could not expect you to abandon your land and your people simply because you have taken a seat in the Ministry," Does Mr Sheehan consider it is nothing that a movement against the claim of the Crown—on which claims some £60,000 have been paid —should emanate from a Cabinet Minister, and be supported by a native agent in the pay of the colony? We will not question the merits of the claim, although the Land Court in its. decision yesterday showed how lightly those merits were esteemed after another patient investigation. However defensible such a course may be regarded from a Maori view of right and wrong, the course is vicious and irregular. Here is a native agent, in receipt of some £300 a-year from the Government, attempting to upset the claims of the Crown, and backed up by a Cabinet Minister, on the ground that the Government have paid their money to the wrong people —a line of opposition which we have no doubt will very soon be shown to be valueless, now that Mr Mackay, the former Land Purchase Agent, who paid the various sums, is in our midst. One of the greatest proofs of the justice of the decision of the Court is a fact which came under our own observation when Mr Mackay arrived here yesterday morning. On being informed of the decision, and asked how much he thought the Ngatirahiri (the opponents) had been awarded, he promptly replied, " 7,000 acres," which is within 500 acres of the actual award, out of a claim to 04,000 acres. Who should know the merits of this case better than Mr Mackay? and the righteousness of the decision of the Court is thus fully admitted by one who is thoroughly conversant with its intricacies. The Government had admitted their claim to a reserve subject to a payment of £2,000 thereon, which was to be investigated by the Court, but this did not satisfy the Hon. Hoani Nahe and W. H. Taipari, native agent. As to the charge that the late Government Land Purchase Agent had paid money to persons who were not entitled to --■% receive it, we have no doubt Mackay will be able to answer such a charge in a manner far from agreeable to those who have dared to make such an assertion, and we shall not be surprised to find an example made of some of those native perjurers who were set,up to support a very shady claim to a large and valuable estate, the future home of the Broomhall settlers.