THE WANGANUI CHRONICLE AND RANGITIKEI MESSENGER. "Vérité sans peur.” Wanganui, May 17, 1860.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 4, Issue 191, 17 May 1860, Page 2

THE WANGANUI CHRONICLE AND RANGITIKEI MESSENGER. "Vérité sans peur.” Wanganui, May 17, 1860.

By the Airedale, which arrived at Jf'elliugton from Taranaki on the Bth May, there is news up to the 3rd inst. from the seat of war. The details will be found elsewhere, extracted from the Taranaki Herald, The expedition to

the south, whichTstarto||’.on the 20th April, returned to Taranaki on Monday the 30th. They remained at Tataraimaka till the 26th, when they proceeded to Waretea, a native village on the Hangatahua, about 20 miles from the town. They‘destroyed the pa and rendered useless the machinery of a mill near it. On Friday, the 27th, they.advaimed to Warea, seven or eight miles,,farther, where a volley was fired at the advanced guard from about a dozen native»vho fled,, and the pa, after .3 24-lb. shots luuf been fired at it, was entered and found empty. It yras burned, with the houses in the neighbourhood. Inland from Warea, about 2| miles, is another pa, surrounded by bush, where it was supposed the natives would be found in force, and an attack it was expected by the troops would be made on it; but on Saturday they received orders to return, and they arrived “at Tataraimaka .the same evening; ( They were fired on at Waretea, 6n their way .' : back, by 70 or 80 Maoris, out of musket range, and suppose they wounded one or two by their return fire. On our men advancing the''natives, retreated. The expedition brought back with them a few bullocks and about a dozen horses out of a larger number that had been captured, but could not be brought home for want of horsemen to drive them. It is believed that Colonel Gold’s return, which excited great indignation at Taranaki, was occasioned by the intelligence, that, a considerable number of the Taranakis had gone north to Kingi, in order to take advantage of the absence of so large a body of the troops, and that a large holly of the Waikatos were on their march to . Taranaki, likewise to join Kingi. It is also understood that the commander of the forces, in accordance with instructions from Anckland,. has refrained from attacking the enemy in order to'”give 'them the greater confidence, and thus induce them to concentrate themselves, when an effectual blow may be struck. ,

Wiremu Kingi remains in his pa near the disputed laud.; and if it were occupied by 400 or 500 natives there would be a good opportunity, with the force now at Taranaki —which with volunteers, militia, and sailors, cannot be less than 2500 men—for doing what might redeem the credit lost at the attack on the former pa at Waitara. There is little doubt now that Wiremu Kingi will be shortly joined, if he has not already been so, by probably 1000 of the Ngatimaniapoto-r-a branch of the Waikatos, who occupy the country between the head of the JFaikato river and the Wanganui. News had come to Taranaki from Raglan (or Whangaroa) that they were on. their march About 400 of the Ngatiruanui. have gone north again.' Ten of the Waitotara natives wished to join' them, but were- dissuaded by Abraham, the chief at the Waitotara ferry, who declared that ■ it woiild destroy his reputation if they went. It is also reported that about 200 of the Ngatiawa, from the Hutt and the west coast south of Otaki, may be expected to go north. It is probable they will take the inland route by the head of the Rangitikei, beibg apprehensive*of being stopped here.

We expected that, in the discussion on the justness of the war which took place here last Thursday, the first point on which the question hinges would have been brought out, and therefore did not advert to it last week. It appears to us, that in making the question depend on the validity and completeness of the purchase, an unnecessary and a very dangerous concession is made to Wiremu Kingi. It is not the nature of Teira’s title to the land pur chased that must first be looked at, but the right of Kingi to interfere between the buyer and the seller. If he has no such right, he would be in the wrong; and the war would be just and necessary, even though the purchase were invalid and incomplete. If' he has a right of interference then the question of title comes into view; but he liimself has never, so far as we are aware, declared,- that Maori custom (on which alone such a right could be supported) gives him authority to take tho matter out of the owners’hands, and certainly the l owners themselves have never invested him with that authority.

If, however, Maori custom does invest him with such a right, the question arises whether British authority is not, even in that case, legally paramount. It must be so if W. Kingi is a British' subject. In that case he certainly had no right to interfere in the manner he has done. The courts of law were open, and he might have brought forward his grievance in them, to be decided by that law to which he has given his adhesion. Is eacli Maori subject to decide for himself what is law, and what is not, and to resist by physical force the execution of what he considers injustice ? The idea is utterly preposterous. But it is the idea encouraged by those who make the justness "of the war hinge on the character of the purchase ; for they virtually allow, that if the purchase is not complete, W. Kingi’s resistance is at least excusable, if not altogether legal. But—(and let ns state that men of standing, and. who ought to be well able to judge, have given us opposing opinions on this point)—some assert that W. Kingi is not a British subject. He did not sign the treaty of Waijtangi; he has never broken the oath of:allegiance anil so considers himself, and is considered by some who ought to know better, an independent potentate. He is therefore not a rebel. - This war is not a civil war. We are engaged in hostilities with a free and independent power. Now the treaty of Waitangi, which cedes the government of New Zealand to her Britannic Majesty, and invests the Maorics with the rights and privileges of

'British subjects’;.^ith only one 1 eseryation (which' was made intte supposition that it was for their by 512 chiefs. These and reprcsentaemselves now alive, and are as much bound by the treaty as sKos& who signed it. There .are at present not above 60,000 natives in the island. How many lof these are slaves we know not; but supposing that they are all free and equal, each of these 512 chiefs has under him on an average 117 individuals; and making the usual allowance for women and children, we find that one in every 29 of the male adult population signed the treaty ; so that not the principal rulers merely, but every petty chief with a following of 28 men, has given in his adhesion to that treaty. And yet w e are told that IV. Kingi, and a host of other chiefs at Taupo and elsewhere, assert their independence, and declare that they never pledged their fealty to the-British government. Is this reasonable ? Is this plea to be admitted by the British government ? Were not these chiefs made cognisant of the treaty at the time it was signed? And if not, does not the will of the majority of a nation bind the minority? It is true that the Maories could scarcely be considered a nation, broken up as they were into so many tribes. And therefore, although we think there is neither reason or justice in this plea of want of nationality, there may be in the Maori mind different ideas of what is reason and justice ; and therefore, for the sake of putting the matter in the most unfavourable position for a decision in favour of the justness of the present war, let us admit that W. Kingi is not a British subject. Then, in what position do we' find him ? He is himself hindering a British subject from selling his own land in accordance with British law. E Teira, a British subject, claims the protection of British law and authority against the forcible aggression of a mau who is not a Jh'itish subject, and w r ho, by a perseverance in that aggression compels the Governor to have recourse to arms to enforce British authority. Can there be any doubt as to the justness of the Governor’s action, and the necessity for it ? We are told, indeed, that there are other owners of the land in question whose claims have not been satisfied. This we do not believe ; first, because the Governor is desirous of satisfying every one who has-any connection with it; aud, secondly, because E ‘ Teira himself is equally anxious to do what is just. Only the other day we heard, from good authority, ol an instance which will corroborate the statement. A native in the south, whose mother held part of this now disputed land, but on leaving that part of the country gave it as a present to Teira, received lately, his mother being dead and himself: not having the least idea of asking anything; the sum of £lO, sent by Teira of his own accord as his proportion of the money received for the land. Now, can it be supposed after that, that Teira would willingly do any one an injustice who had the slightest claim on him for a share of the purchase money ? The more we look at the question really at issue between the Governor and his opponents, the more thoroughly are we convinced, that to have conceded what Wirimu Kingi demanded would have been to put the settlers in the position of vassals ol the Maori king.

The meeting on Thursday was in some respects a remarkable one. Its origin was mysterious. Who convened it? It was not till Mr. Fox drew forth from his modest obscurity the chairman of the private conclave that had called the public meeting, and invited Mr. Fox to attend it, that anything was publicly known as to who had convened it. For anything that appears to the contrary any two schoolboys, with enough of pocket money to pa)' for its advertisement, might equally well have called it together—and the proceedings might have been in that case just as satisfactory. It would be much more becoming, that gentlemen holding these semi-private meetings to initiate great public movements, should let the public know who they are. This mystery was not accidental, but was apparently intended to be continued during the whole of the proceedings. For the most remarkable thing is, that not one of those public spirited gentlemen ventured to prefer the accusation against Mr. Fox, on the consideration of which some of them at least .had in private solemnly adjudged him unworthy of being their representative. On the contrary, the chairman at the initiatory meeting—(quantum mutatus ab illo Hectore) —seemed to think he had placed himself in a rather unpleasant predicament, and virtually apologised for the proceedings on the ground of the extreme excitement prevailing in the town. And their choice of a public prosecutor was equally remarkable—the gentleman who was put into that office being a nonelector, and not very likely, by his reputation in the district, to influence the opinions of any one, while his statements, so fierce and exaggerated, were only fitted to disgust the sensible portion of the audience. Surely, the electors of Wanganui know Mr. Fox too well to suspect for a moment what this gentleman more than insinuated. The sudden conversion of the accuser into the defender was also highly amusing. Had he received instructions so to act, or was his previous task uncongenial, and was he glad to ftake the first opportunity of retracting his unfounded statements ? The so-called amendment (which was, however, rather a separate resolution) was also a remarkable proposal, inasmuch as it had for its object to bind Mr. Fox to agree to no one knew wliat. For we venture to say, that not one of bis constituents, any more than himself, can tell what is the Governor’s policy—or whether he has any at all. His system has hitherto apparently been, to let things hang as

they grow; and it is only the violent stroke he lately' received from the Home Government that has overcome the vis inertia. What may be his further proceedings no one can prognosticate, and probably’the proposer of the amendment might have been the very first to find fault with Mr. Fox for acting in conformity to it. And lastly, the meeting was remarkable, because it left matters in the end just as they were at the beginning. Mr. Fox made no retractation, no explanation even, so far as we can understand him ; for, surely, no one who knows Mr. Fox’s past career, needed the assurance which was accepted as an explanation, that he was aiojal subject of Queen Victoria, and would act as such in times of rebellion and danger; and, indeed, what explanation could he give of a letter which is written in as intelligible English as ever was penned ? Now, we think the promoters of this meeting are to blame. They first construction on Mr. Fox’s letter, which, so far as we have been able to see, its contents did not warrant. They then called a public meeting to have their minds set at rest on the subject. Not one of them appeared to mention the point needing explanation. No opportunity was given Mr. Fox to say, what we have a strong on something more than mere imagination, he would have said, had a fair opportunity occurred for saying it, — namely, that so far as his present knowledge of the facts of the case goes, he is inclined to believe the Governor in the right; but that, as other circumstances may come to light to alter his opinion of the proceedings, he is not inclined, as a member of the General Assembly —in which it is likely the whole question may be brought up—to give any decision on it until he has been put in possession of all the evidence bearing on it that can be adduced. If some such declaration had been proposed to him, be might very likely have endorsed it, and thus that subdued suspicion which still lies smouldering in the minds of many would have been completely extinguished.