Monday, July, 28, 1862.

Wellington Independent, Volume XVII, Issue 1747, 31 July 1862, Page 3

Monday, July, 28, 1862.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 12 o'clock. Incorrect Reporting. Mr. WELD called attention to an error that had crept into a report in the Independent, oi' July 26th, in which he had been made by inference to repudiate the Treaty of -Vaitangi, whereas he had on the contrary insisted that it was binding on us to fulfil every point and tittle of it. Mr. STAFFORD referred to thu reports in tho Welling on papers as beinggeno rally incorrect. In particular in his speech on Major Richardson's motion, he was made briefly to say, that the Government was perfectly justified in what they had done, which was quite incorrect. He only said they were justified in sweeping away tho old Land purchase Department. After some remarks by the Hon Mr: FOX and Mr. BELL, the subject dropped. Illegal occupation of Native Lands. Mr. JO LL IE moved, "'For a return of all Kuropeans known to be in occupation of Native land in each Province of the North Island, specifying as minutely as may be practicable, the year when each occupation began, the quantity of land held by each individual, the tribe it belongs to, the character of the tenure (whether by sufferance or by positivo lease or agreement), the amount of rent or other consideration given, the value of the stoc:k or other property possessed by each occupant, the number of his family and his trade or profession, — together with a statement of all prosecutions instituted by Government under the provisions of the Native Land Purchase Ordinance." jaThe Hon. COLONIAL SECRETARY said tho only item of this return which the Government would be able to furnish would be the prosecutions. They had no othoj means of knowing who occupied native land. Tho hon. member might as well ask for a return of how many glasses of spirits had been sold to natives contrary to law. Mr. JOLLIE pressed for the return and the motion was carried on a division by 22 to ID. The adjourned Debate on Ministerial Responsibility. Mr. CRO3BIE -WARD" resumed the Debate. He referred briefly to tho intentions of the Government in the resolution now proposed. It was one of a middle character equally removed from the doctrine of complete responsibility, and from that piopoundcd in the opposite extreme The abandonment of all responsibility in Native affairs would be a retrograde step which ho hoped the Colony would not take — under any circumstances the course proposed to vote money and to docliuo any control over its expenditure would be a dereliction of duty, Tho question was one affecting the formation of the Constitution, and he begged hon. members to be exceedingly careful in coming te a decision upon it. Mr. STAFFORD, Sir, the speech which the House has just heard from the hon, tho Postmaster j

General, is so far fortunate that it was entirely confined to the subject of the motion now being discussed. And it is a matter of congratulation to the House that, with but trifling exceptions, the debate, generally, has been confined to the fundamental constitutional question of the relations between the mother country and the colony with respect to the government of the Natives. Thug, Sir, the question — one in its very essence, of a complicated and embarrassing nature — has not been further complicated by extraneous allusions. I propose to follow the same course, believing that this is not the occasion on which to advocate or denounce any particular policy; to critizise tho wisdom, or the contrary of any special act of administration; to consider what should be done, or how it should be done; but who ia to do it, (Hear, hear.) In approaching the consideration of this question, I am ' oppressed, 1 frankly admit, by a sense of great responsibility, and of very great embarrassment— an enibarrasment not arrising out of the terms of the motion, or of recent date, but one which I have experienced for the last six years, during which Responsible Government has been established in this country. The hon. the Postmaster General has fairly enough placed before the House the position of a Responsible Government in a dependency of an Empire. It is simply impossible that the system of the responsibility of tho Executive to the elected representatives of the people can be worked in the same complete manner in a dependency, as it is- or may be, ia an independent nation. In the latter, the sovereign Executive power, whether called constitutional King, or by some other i:aae, and the legislature, have to deal with eacli other alone. There is no power outside of those two bodies which can affect their relations to each other. But with respect to a depandency thers ia always an external power capable of controlling aud directing the action of the local government. How do we stand in this country with respect to this outside controlling power? It might have happened that we might have been in the same position as some other colonies having Representative Legislatures — as the Cape Colony, from which the present Governor has last come — that no Ministerial responsibility to control the actions of the Governor had been established. ,In that case European and native questions would be on the same footing, and one element of the complication which surrounded the consideration of the question in this country would have been absent. In that position too, he would aay with reference to the speech of the hon. member for Ellesmere, we might have controlled the supplies voted as effectually as we could now do. But in this country the direct responsibility of the Executive to the Legislature in all matters affecting Colonial interests only had for some years been established. And I may here observe, that I have never for one moment contemplated any withdrawing from the system now in operation. Nor am I aware that any of those with whom I am on terms of political intimacy, ever dreamed of any diminution of the power and influence which the Legislature now exercises over the Executive, as the hon. member for Wallace seemed to infer, (hear, hear.) I indignantly repudiate such an assertion ; on the contrary I shall always maintain, as I have hitherto maintained, that the Government of the colony, in purely colonial matters, should be, and can best be, administered in deference to the expressed wishes of the representatives of the colony, and by persons directly responsible to the Legislature for the manner in which it is administered. (Bear, hear.) We are thus in this position of difficulty, that as to one class of public affairs the Government is entirely responsible for its action to the Legislature of New Zealand, and there is no interference with that action ; while with respect to another large clasa there is a great power outside the colony which has both the right and the will to interfere, as has been lately shown by the very appointment of Sir George Grey to administer the Government. Does tho-i3§ekition now proposed by Ministers meet this difficulty ? To my mind it not only does not do that, but it infinitely and most indefinitely increases it. It proposes to do nothing. There is nothing of real power or significance in it. It is mere empty words in so far as it may | propose to establish .any real power or responsibility as to the administration of Native affairs, while it raises up an indefinite liability for that administration. This very indelinitness of the motion is its chief objection. Except as to a mere departmental arrangement it indicates nothing save a movement in some direction ; as a policeman might say to a crowd in the street " Move on," without saying how far, or where to. I cannot, therefore, give my assent to more than the first portion of it — as far as the word "colony," in the seventh line — and I may here express some .surprise that this proposition of Ministers, now belbre the House for some time, has, while it has been opposed and objected to from all sides of the House, not yet received any support from a single member. I have been informed, it is true, that Ministers claim the speech of the lion member for Wallace, as supporting it. It was not my good fortune to hear the whole of that hon. gentleman's speech, but I must say that the half of it which I did hear appeared to me to be most damaging to the motion. (Laughter.) . The hon. the Colonial Secretary urged in favour of the motion, that it is impossible to separate questions affecting the colonists from Native questions ; that they overlapped so constantly that the responsibility of deciding all matters relating to both questions must be in the same hands to prevent what he termed a " dead-L'ck ;" and that Ministers consequently must have the control of Native questions. But admitting fully ihe overlapping character of the questions, how did the proposition of the hon. gentleman meet the difficulty ? Nay, did it not rather increase the liability of deadlocks arising? As the House now understood the explanations given of the meaning of the resolution before it, the words " Imperial questions " were to be taken as referring only to the employment of the Imperial troops. [Mr. Fox I did not narrow it to that only.] Well after any explanation which may be given of what Ministers may or may not intend by the words <l Imperial question," I fail to perceive how tho liability of a conflict and clashing of responsibility! may be avoided if Native questions are, because they are Imperial questions also, to be controlled and decided by a different machinery h-oin that which- they propose should govern all other questions of Native policy or administration (hear hoar). It appears to me that their proposition, if affirmed and acted on, would only remove the conflct of responsibility, and liability to deadlock, from minor and less important questions to those of the gravest character, and which would most permanently affect the Europeans in this country; to just those questions Sir, which arj matters of life and death, and of the utter destruction of property. (Hear, hoar). But r contend that the distinction Ministers seek to make the House believe , to be a perfectly easy matter, that is to say say a separation ,of Native questions* and policy into those which are imperial, and those which concern the Cqlony only, cannot be made, (hear, hear). Simply because all those questions without exception depend for their enforcement upon the same power. From all or any of them tho necessity for enforcing obodiencs on the natives may arise ; and whomever it does arise, whatever may be the cause, the power of enforcing that necessary obedience is not a colonial one. For all important military movemonts, whether to repel external attack, or suppress a grave internal insurrection, the Colony must, for a consideable time, depend mainly on the army and navy of the mother country, the decision a3 to the employment of. which the Colonial Ministry would not be permitted to have. They should not therefore seek to decide Native questions, all of which might necessitate tho employment of the army and navy of an external power. For I repeat that no defined or clear separation can be made between those Native questions which might, and those which might not lead to the employment

ot force. (Hear hear). Take for instance the question of the purchase of land from the Natives That is one which Ministers, I presume, seek to decide on the ground that it intimately concerned the Colonists, and it conld not be pretended that it did not intimately concern their lives and properties, but every member of the House would admit that it ivas an Imperial question also. It is therefore to my mind less likely that conflicts of responsibility, or deadlocks, will arise if the same rule is in the present state of the Colony, applied to all questions of Native policy or administration. And that rule should be as it was, when the late Government and Ministry were in office, that the

viinisters should know and advise upon all Native questions whatsoever, Imperial or not, but that the ultimate deeiaion should rest with the Governor (hear, hoar). But if that was not to be the rule, and there was to be a separation of Native questions into those as to which Ministers were to have the responsibility and the supreme voice, and those with whicli they were not to interfere, then it was just thoae grave questions which might peril the lives and property of the colonists, which they proposed to have nothing to do with, that they dhould be responsible for (hear, hear). It had been stated by the hon. the Colonial Secretary, in support of his proposal, that the relations established between the late Governor and his Ministers, by the memoranda of 1856, were swept away by the Legislation of 1858. [Mr. Fox — I did not say swept away, I said altered.] [Mr. Carleton — I took down the hon. gentleman's words, and they were " taken away."] I understood the hou. member for Wallace to ' make, in effect, the same statement, and so far his speech might, perhaps be said to have been in support of Ministers. I am surprised that, the analytical mind of that hon. member failed to perciive the difference between the powers of the Governor referred to in the memoranda of 1856, and those constituted by the Acts passed by the Legislature in 1858. The distinction between those powers was obvious. The first were powers which the Representative of the Grown could exercise in virtue of the Royal Prerogative, or under the provisions of Acts of the Imperial Parliament, as the Constitution Act and others. The latter powers were new ones requi ring to be established by some statute, either of tha Imperial or Colonial Parliament. ZSTo statute conferring such powers being in existence at the time, the late Government came to this Legislature in 1858, and asked it to confer these new powers on the Governor. The Legislature consented and passed the Acts in question, and in doing so provided, very properly, that the new power it was creating should only be exercised by the Governor with the consent of the Ministers of New Zealand, who would thus be responsible to the people for the exercise of them. Tlie hon. member for Wallace was not, therefore, justified in ascribing to me, or to any of those with whom I acted, a disposition to withdraw from positions we iiad formerly taken, because, while requiring in 1858 that some new powers conferred on the Governor of acting in native matters should be used only with the consent of Ministers, we now refuse to demand entire ministerial responsibility in all native matters, (hear, hear.) I have" already said that I objected to this motion on account of its vagueness. ■ That while it failed to define anything—even what is meant by the word Imperial — it left in the power of the Imperial Government to attach any signification it might please to it, and any liability on the colony for the result of the administration of tha Government in native questions which it might think proper to attach. I object altogether to this position of undefined respjsibility and uncertain liability. Let not the hon. member for Ellesmere suppose that I desire, as he might infer from my taking the view opposite from himself of this resolntion, not to hold this Governor accountable to this House for what he may do iti native matters. I hold as strongly as the hon. member, or any person could do, the absolute necessity of the Governor being accountable for the native policy and administration. w*e only differ as to the mode in which that accountability is to be ensured. The proposition before the House does not ensure it. Still less would the plan of the hon. member for Ellesmure ensure it. Indeed, the very esssence of that plan, that ministers should be responsible for everything, would entail, as a necessary corollary, that the Governor would be responsible for nothing. (Hoar, hear). The position was so transparent that I am astonished at the illogical conclusion at which the hon. member has arrived in his desire to tix accountability on the Governor. I say this with the highest respect for the acknowledged talent of the hon. member, and for the power of clearly expressing his opinions for which he is .so famous, which, however, renders the extraordinary self-delusion under which the hon. gentleman labours on the present occasion all tha more remarkable (laughter). It is because I desire to hold the Governor accountable to this House that I by no means will be content to hold the hon. gentlemen opposite responsible for tha native policy, and thus to transfer the accountability from the Governor to them. I will not place them in that position — '• Like feather bed betwixt the wall, And heavy brunt of cannon ball." If you place fenders in the shap3 of Ministers between the people and the sovereign power — if you placj the head of the Executive in the place of a ," constitutional sovereign" • — it is an idle fiction to say that you can hold him personally accountable. Balieviug it to be undesirable to place the Governor in that position in native mat. ters, I believe it to ba equally impossible. The Home Government, by appointing Sir George Grey, when and how it did, to administer the Government on a grave emergency, will hold him responsible for his conduct. His Excellency could not, even if he would, of wnieh we hare no evidence, get rid of this responsibility. Would it not. therefore, bs absurd for us to affect to look to ministers as being responsible for native matters ? To place ourselves in the position of being content with carping at or criticising their measures whilo we profess to hold the Governor irresponsible? The Governor can at any moment take up a position of deep importance to the dearest interests of the colonists without the possibility of this House controlling him. The lion, member for Ellesmere says we can control him by stopping the supplies. What a delusion ! although I am almost afraid to apply such a word to one wiiom I admire so much us the hon. gentleman. This House has no such control ; it cannot stop the only supplies which would really interfere with the most important action by which the Governor could affect the inhabitants of this cmntry — the supplies by which the troops and ships of war are maintained (hear, hear). And when we hear of ministerial ' responsibility in Native matters, we may ask if it has occurred, that in all such matters tfiere was a complete concord of opinion, between His Excellency and the lion, gentleman opposite. Differences of opinion are reported already to have taken place, as with respect to Coromandel for instance, (Mr. Fox, not the smallest difference has taken place either with respect to Coromandel or any other matter). If that is the case then as to what has been done at Coromandel some comments on the transactions would, when questions of policy were being discussed, be made on the conduct of gentlemen who expressed very decided opinions two years since, (hear hear). We all agreed with the hon. member for Ellesinere in recogni- . sing the obligation under which the Colony lay, to do its utmost, in aiding to civilize and educate tho Native race. Neither our sympathies nor efforts would be wanting towards this great end. Nor had they been so hitherto. I may refer the hon, gentleman to the language used by my late colleague (Mr. Richmond) whose speeches, dr rather essays, in support of that object during the passing of the Native Bills, in the Session of 1858, have elicited the highest commendation, not only in the Colony but in the Mother Country and elsewhere, and were copied into the London press (hear,

hear). When the present Native policy, that is the attempt to civilize the Natives by means of themselves, was referred to as a new policy it might be remarked that the real paternity of the idea, and the legislation by which.it was to be carried into effect, originated with the late Governor and Ministry in 1858. Had circumstances not occurred to prevent its being brought into operation at once, it would have been more successful than it was now ever likely to be (hear, hear). What these circumstances were I am debarred from stating now and it is probable that they never N will be stated. I will return to the resolution before the House. Sir, in view of the impossibility, in the present state of the colony, of establishing one uniform course by which the Government of New Zealand should be guided in all matters, and with respect to all the conflicting interests, this resolution proposes a compromise between those interests — a compromise of a kind to which I cannot assent. I too, Sir, will propose a compromise — one for which there is sufficient precedent — one which was frequently acted on by a people who made their presence felt in their time. The Romans, Sir, in grave emergencies, used to appoint a Dictator for a limited time. The Dictator could suspend any law which interfered with liis acting for' the public safety during his Dictatorship, but when the period had transpired was held to account for the mode in which he had exercised his great powers ; when he was either rewarded or degraded and punished — even sometimes with. death. Sir, I would in the present position of this portion of the Colony be prepared to see Sir G. GreyJ on any emergencies which may occur in Native matters, act as a Dictator, for one yflar, . with respect to such emergencies. At the end of that time this House would consider how he had acted, and whether it was fitting or not that such discretionary power should be possessed by him. (cheers.) DR. FEATHERSTON— Sir, There are so many opinions expressed by the hon. member who haa just addressed the House, and by previous speakers in which I concur, that I am in some respects in difficulties ; for if there is one thing which I hate more than another it is to travel over ground that already has been trod — to repeat arguments that have already been enforced. Yet, Sir, after the able manner in which the resolution before the House has been discussed by both sides of the House — by those who support and those who opposed it — I find it difficult, nay impossible, to avoid referring to topics that have been touched upon and far more ably handled than I can possibly pretend to handle them. Sir, the hon. member who has just safe down, and other hon. members have expressed the deep anxiety with which they approached the subject under discussion. Sir, the case in my opinion is so plain and simple that I cannot acknowledge to feeling the slightest anxiety about it. or about the result of this debate. Sir, some hon. members have felt themselves labouring under the difficulty of reconciling their present opinions with those they have repeatedly expressed on former occasions in this House. Sir, no such difficulty perplexes or embarrasses me. 1 I am not here like my hon. friend the member for Cheviot, and other hon. members, to explain away or to recant opinions, but unlike those hon. members I am here, to reiterate, to stand-by every opinion I have ever enunciated in regard to the administration of Native affairs. Sir, some hon. members, especially those who had recently, or rather all of a sudden, become converts to the doctrine of Responsible Government in Native affairs— repudiate the very idea of their opposition to the resolution of my hon. friend at the head of the Govenment, being dictated by party motives for party purposes — and would fain persuade my hon. friend and his colleagues on the treasury bench, that in the event of the resolution being negatived they should bow to and accept the decision of the House — would stick to that bench, go oa as if nothing had happened and prepare themselves for still more signal defeats, for still greater humiliations — Sir, could I for one moment believe that my hon. friends on the treasury bench had not made up their minds to stand or fall by the resolution, to stake their existence as a Ministry on the result of the debate.— -could I entertain the slightest impression that they are to* day, or ever will be prepared to abandon the cardinal principle, the key stone of their whole Native policy — I mean the administration of Native affairs by Ministers responsible to this House, I should readily join hon. gentlemen opposite in this or any other motion which should have the effect of placing them on the treasury bench. Sir, in spite of their disclaimers 1 denounce this as simply a party move, and I trust no hon. member, will allow himself to be deceived as to its real character and intent. It is to all intents and purposes simply a party movement, or else why should hon. members opposite repudiate and re* cant all the opinions they expressed so recently as September last. Sir, when I say this is a party movement and must be treated and regarded as such, I entirely acquit vay hon friend the member for EUeamere, my hon. friend the Superintendents of Canterbury and Otago, and other hon. members near me of being parties to this party movement. But I repeat it is a party movement, and if the resolution be negatived, my hon. friend at the head of the Government and hia colleagues have no other course open to them than at once to place their resignations in the hands of His Excellency. And now, Sir, with regard to the resolution itself, T am unwilling after this protracted debate, on a question which has been 80 repeatedly discussed and decided by this House, to detain you, but I am nevertheless anxious if you will permit me, very briefly to explain some of the grounds upon which I shall support the resolution of my hon. friend at the head of the government. Sir, while I readily admit the importance of the question submitted to this House, and still more frankly acknowledge the gravity of the issues involved, in it, I must be permitted to express my deep regret that my hon. friend at the head of the government should have so . readily adopted the course suggested the other evening by the hon. member for Cheviot, he has to my miud fallen into a trap — very carefully laid, very skilfully planned — a trap from vthioh it is not easy to escape. It appears to me, Sir, that my hon. friend in consenting to define specifically the relations that are to be maintained between the Governor and hia Responsible advisers either in regard to Native or other affairs hs simply consented to attempt an impossibility. Sir, no such demand in any country enjoying Responsible Institutions or Parliamentary Government has ever been made by the Legislature. I need not therefore add that no such task has ever been imposed upon any Constitutional Govern. ment as has been undertaken by my hon. friend at the head of tha Government, that of defining and reducing to writing the relations between the Crown or the Crown's Representative and their Responsible advisers. It has in the course of thi3 debate already been correctly stated that Responsible Government in England rests upon no law ; that the British Constitution nowhere declares the responsibility of Ministers, but simply secures it by a| tacit understaading between the Crown and the Commons. I may further observe that even the Cabinet is not a body recognised by law or by the Constitution, and that no attempt has ever been made to define the relations between the Crown and the Crown's Responsible advisers. In illustration or proof of this, I may refer hon. members to the difference which many years since arose between Her Majesty and her then advisers, with respect to the appointment of the ladies of the bedchamber. Sir Robert Peel, (the Prime Minister, claimed the right of appointment ; Her Majesty demurred ; the whole question was submitted to Parliament ; it gave rise to a long and exciting debate. Parliament ultimately deciding that the position insisted upon by Sir Robert Peel was untenable and unjustifiable. I submit that this case shows that any dispute arising between the Crown's representative and his advisers must be referredto and decided by the Legislature. But, Sir, it appear to me strange that hon. members cannot peroeiv 8 ''--■ ; -■> -, ■ ■'- -'^• i

that if it has been found impossible to define, unwise to attempt to define the relations between the Crown's advisers and the Sovereign, who is responsible to no one, then it must be still more difficult, still more impossible to define the relations between his Responsible advisers and tho Governor of a Colony who is specially charged with Imperial interests, aud who is responsible for the proper guardianship and protection of those interests to the Imperial Government. But, Sir, any attempt to define those relations in this colony, inhabited by a native race just emerging from barbarism, must be still more hopeless ; for before you can attempt any such definition you are bound to specify and define how far Native interests are Imperial interests, and you are further called upon to draw a line of demarcation between these Native — these Imperial interests, and interests purely Colonial. Sir, I need not say that this is a hopeless, an impossible task. Colonial, Native, and Imperial interests are so interwoven, so entangled, that it is impossible to separate them — impossible to say where Imperial inte ests begin or end, and therefore utterly absurd, utlely childish to attempt to define the relations between the Governor who is specially charged with Imperial interests, who cannot possibly divest himself of his responsibility in regard to those interests to the Imperial Government and his Responsible advisers. Sir, these relations are of so delicate a natme ; they vary so much from day to day ; they are so constantly changing ; .they depead| jo much upon the good sense, uponjthj common State — upon the tact and discretion of the two parties concerned — the Governor and his Ministers, that it is I repeat utterly impossible to lay off a boundary line between them. It is upon these grounds that I regret that my hon. friend has adopted the suggestion of the hon. member for Cheviot, and submitted to tho House the present resolution with a view of defining relations which are undefinable. Sir, in making these remarks it will not be supposed chat I am averse to the adoption of Ministerial Responsibility in the administration of Native affairs as far as practicable, for hon. members who had seats in this House in 1856, will remember that when the present Attorney General who was then premier, and his then colleague my lion, friend the member for Wallace, brought down to the House a memorandum agreed to between themselves and the late Governor, in which the conditions upon which the Governor would consent to the introduction of Responsible Government. I was one of a minority which protested agaiust the acceptance of that memorandum I then declared, that if the administration of Native affairs was vested in the Governor, if it was withdrawn from his Responsible advisers, that Responsible Government was a mere shani and delusion, I did than earnestly implore and entreat this House not to accept Eesponsible Government, with any such condition, any such stipulation annexed to it. Sir, I then believed as I still believe that as the peace of the whole colony, the safety, and welfare of the two races inhabiting it depended mainly if not exclusively upon the manner in which the delicate relations aubsist ■ ing between Her Majesty's Government, and the Natives were handled and treated ; it was an act of sheer madness to entrust the managenientof Native afiairs into the hands of a Governor, who in tho great majority of cases must, on assuming the administraton of the government of the colony be utterly ignorant of everything connected with it, and especially ignorant of every thing relating to Native matters, andyet who by the House agreeing to the conditions then proposed would necessarily be forced to seek, and require information, not from Ministers enjoying the confidence of, and responsible to this House, but from subordinate officers wholly irr.esponble for the advice they gave, it might be from officers not only incompetent but disposed in eveiy possible way to run counter to the wishes and opinions of the Representatives of the Colony. I pointed out that as long- as any controul over the administration of Native affairs was denied to this House, there was no inducement held out to hon. members of this House, to, no reason why they should, make themselves acquainted with, or take the slightest interest in Native affairs and that therefore Native affairs would be grossly mismanaged, and the interests of thu Natives still more grossly neglected — Sir, that Native affairs have been grossly mismanaged, I apprehend few if any will deny, that the interests of the Natives have been still more grossly neglected, we have the admissions both of the late Governor, and of the late Ministry, the opinions I then entertained were so fully stated that the late Governor thought it expedient to bring them under, the special consideration of her Majesties principal Secretary of State for the Colonies. Sir, though a very considerable minority in £his House concurred in those views, I am free to confess that they" did not at the time find much favour outside of it, and that the " Periti" as they have bsen termed, expressed a very decided repugnance to tham. The late Governor, when the question of Ministerial Responsibility in regard to Native afiairs was first bioached, addressed a circular letter to some, I don't know how many (Mr Bell 60) of this so called "Pereti" requesting their opinion upon it— and the whole of this " Pereti" including the highest dignitaries iri the several churches, comprising the chief officers connected with the Native department, and all who were in any way supposed to have a knowledge of the Natives, denounced with two exceptions the doctrine ot Ministerial responsibility in regard to Native affairs as a villainous heresy. Who were the two individuals who dhssnted from the denunciation of the doctrine of Minsterial Responsibility ? I believe that I am right in stating (but hon. members will correct me if I am wrong) that Mr. Atkins an old settler at Kaipara was one, but I know that the other was Archdeacon Hadfield ; and hers 1 cannot help saying, after the asparsions cast upon that gentleman, after the unfair, the ungenerous, the unjust treatment he received at' the hand 3of this House two years ago. after the charges then made against him of au undue leaning towards the Natives — I cannot help saying that a more complete answer to those insinuations, to those charges could not have been given ; a more triumphant indication of his honor and character, could nothayebeen by himself desired than is afforded by this simple fact— that while some six years ago •this House supposed to represent the colony, assented to the withdrawal from its control of the administration of native affairs, while at the same Governor reprobated in the strongest possible terms time, the whole of the " Periti" consulted by the* the veiy idea of handing over the management of native affairs to the Genei al Assembly, Archdeacon Hadtield (with the exception I have mentioned) was the only man , who had the courage to stand forth, and declare, that he had such implicit faith in. the honesty, integiity and justice of his fellow-countrymen — such belief iv Representative Institutions — such confidence in the General Assembly, that he urged as strongly as he well could and by arguments as cogent as could be well employed, the expediency and policy of entrusting the administration of Native affairs to Ministers responsible to this House, Sir, I repeat that a more complete answer to charges was never given, a more triumphant vindication of his character was never afforded to any man, than has been afforded to Archdeacon Hadfield by the simple fact that he some six. years ago expressed far greater confidence in the sense of justice which would guide this House in its dealings with the Natives, than the House itself has ever manifested in itself, Sir, if such were the opinions, I in common, with -others held in 1856, 1 need scarcely say.that instead of retracting or even modifyin" them, we have now been strenghte'ned and confirmed in: them by the events that have taken place during the last few years, in short during the administration of the late Governor under the B \th m ef ilTe3 P onßible government in Native Affairs. lam anxious to avoid, as far as possible, any reference to past events, or to revive discussions which would only irritate and provoke, without L-eing productive of any beneficial results. But I must be permitted to remind this House that the announcement >of Sir George Grey's re-

appointment to the Government of this colony — came upon it like a clap of thunder. That the intelligence was received by many with ill disguised feelings of disappointment, that not a few gave utterance to their suspicions that the Constitution would be suspended, and that nothing short of a complete dictatorship would satisfy his Excellency Sir George Grey. It was mainly, C bjlieve, owing to these insinuations that the House was induced before it closed its session, to pass the resolution relating to Ministerial liesponsibility In regard to Native affairs, which was moved by my hon. friend the member for Wallace. Sir, that resolution was intended as a public protest against Sir George Grey's supposed designs upon the Constitution— as a standing protest against Native affairs bein£ any longer conducted, except en the principle ot Ministerialllesponsibility. So dreaiifully alarmed were some hon. members then lest Sir George Grey should take by storm the rights and privileges conferred by the Constitution ; — so determined were they to prove themselves the zealous guardians of Constitutional Government, that without waiting for his Excellency's arrival — without giving an opportunity of explaining his views, of intimating his intentions, they, as it were condemned aud convicted him, unheard and unseen, and with unseemly haste passed the resolution which has been in this debate so often referred to-a resolution in which they virtually dared and defied him to suspend the Constitution, or in any way to violate it — a resolution in which they declared the conditions upon which alone they would racognixe or receive — in short a resolution, in which they intimated that their ultimatum was His Excellency's unconditional acceptance of the principle "of Ministerial responsibility in Native affairs. Now, let me ask hou. members who stood in such awe of Sir Geprge Grey's supposed designs upon the Constitution whether any one of their insinuations has been borne out — whether any one of the predictions they then hazarded has been fulfilled ? Sir George Grey arrives, and what are the steps he takes ? Does ha suspend the Constitution ? Does he proclaim himself sole Dictator ? Does he attempt to curtail any one of your rights or privileges ? Does he, in short, justify you hi any one of the accusations, or insinuations you hurled at him. Sir, so far from fulfilling any one of these predictions he no sooner arrives in the Colony, than he proceeds to investigate the causes of past disorders, and having- satisfied himself that the chief cause of the disease was that specified in your resolution of last September, namely, the administration of Native affairs by the Governor, independent of his Ministers, he at once declares that henceforth Her Majesty's representatives will be guided in Native matters, as well as in all others, by Ministers responsible to the House. Doss he attempt, as has been so sedulously and industriously circulated, to thrust upon the colony the expenses of the past war — or to increase the bu> dens you have already imposed upon yourselves? So far from this, that, while he asks for a further contribution of some £24,000 for Native purposes lie offers to relieve the colony from a contribution of some i'io.OOO which you had pledged yourselves to pay to the Imperial Government as your contribution to the expenses of the troops. Does he attempt to force upon the colony schemes, or a system of government for the natives exclusively his own ? Sir, 1 was surprised to hear my hou. friend at the head of the Government state theother day that the scheme of Native Government before the House was Sir George Grey's. For it must be apparent to all, that His Excellency, in the scheme of government ho has framed," has simply applied and embodied the recommendations of the Waikato Committee, an.l the suggestions of the Ministers conveyed in various memoranda. I again ask, whether a single accusation or insinuation hurled at His Excellency before his arrival, had been borne out by his proceedings ? Sir, the difficulty I feel in this matter ia simply to ascertain what hon. members who oppose the resolution really mean. It is in substance precisely the same as the one which they adopted last session without a division. Am Ito infer that hon. members have changed their opinions, and that they are now unwilling to accept any responsibility in Native affairs'? If so, we are surely entitled to know the grounds upon which they have changed their opinions. It cannot be on the ground that they are afraid of being asked to defray the cost cither of the past war, or of the proposed Native institutions; for, in the first place, the sum now demanded for Native purposes is less than the amount you pledged yourselves last session to pay. In the second place, the resolution itself expressly repudiates any such liability ; and in the said plan, one of the proposals of the present -Ministry is that the sum to be asked from this House shall not for the ensuing period of five years exceed £50/>OJ a year; and further you have, as has been repeatedly stated, the pledge of the Duke of Newcastle, that the Imperial Government will be ready to treat the colony (in regard to military expenditure), " with as much indulgence as their duty will permit, on tho subject of tho charges of military protection, and the number of troops, to be maintained in New Zealand." Still less, Sir, can I for one moment believe, that this house is determined to refuse to Sir George Grey that cordial co-operation, which he has asked, and upon which he mainly relies for success in tho discharge of the onerous duties he has undertaken at great personal sacri-fices—-in the spirit of the noblest patriotism ; and yet, Sir, if this House rejects the resolution, I cannot see what other construction can be put upon it, than that you refuse to afford to his Excellency any, even the slightest assistance. Sir, hon. members may cry No, No, but I repeat that no other conclusion is deducible from such a determination. For his Excellency has in the most emphatic manner in his despatch of the 30th November last, to the Duke of Newcastle, intimated the kind of assistance which he expected and asked for from this House — assistance which hon. gentlemen opposite now call upon you to refuse. His Excellency in that despatch, after explaining that hitherto the Governor had retained the management of Native affairs in his own hands goes on to say— "i. Under this s« stem there would be two Go. veniments ia the Colony, which not only'vrould not always aid one another, but which would sometimes act ai cross purposed with each other. 5. At the present crisis it is quite impossible that Her Majesty's Government could be' advantageously carried on under such a system. I therefore immediately arranged to consult my Kespon sible Ministers ia relation to native affairs, in the same manner as upon nil other subjects, and in like manner to act through them in relation to all native matters. If any serious difference takes place betweeu us on tliese subjects. I must, as in other cases, resort to other advisers, und appual iv fact to the General Assembly." Now Sir, (Mr. Stafford, will the hon. gentleman also read paragraphs 9 and 10). " 9. Another disadvantage of the system of making the Governor chiefly responsible for Native afiairs, is, thot it will be thought that the wars which may arise under it have sprung, whether rightly or wrongly, from the acis of the Representative of the British Government, over wiiose proceedings the Colonial Legislature had but very imperfect control : so that it would seem difficult to call upon that body to find the means of defraying the cost of the war, for the origin, continuance, or conduct of which it was only in an indirect manner responsible. 10. Under the system I have adopted the Gover. nor and .Ministers aot as mutual checks eauh upon the other. if either of them wishes to force on some proceeding 1 which the other party regards as unjust to the natives, or us injurious to their reusonable interests, it is kuowu to boil' that the ultimate appeal must be made to the General Assembly, and that the justness of ihe 'intentions of each party wiil become a matter of public discussion. Itia, therefore, reasonable to think that each of them would carefully consider the grounds on which they were acting, before incurring tho risk of au appeal of this nature."

His Excellency here tells you as plainly as he well could, that lie cannot execute the mission entrusted to him, that he cannot retrieve past disasters, and establish the relations between Her Majesty's Gove-mment and the Natives on a satisfactory basis — that ho cannot insure the future peace of the Colony or the welfare of both races without the assistance of this House, without you agree to tho introduction of Ministerial Responsibility into the administration of Native affairs as well as .of all others; jis this House then prepared to refuse that assistance which his Excellency claims and to which he is so fully entitled, if it is, it has simply to reject the resolution of my honble. friend. But air, there does appear to me to be this further inconsistency on the part of those who oppose this resolution. If there is one charge that lias been more frequently made, more constantly urged by men of all parties against Sir George Grey — it. is that during his former administration of the Government of the Colony he trusted in managing the Natives, entirely to his own personal influence, and that as soon as lie left, his system at once fell to pieces. Those who make this charge ought to remember, that at that period there wera no political institution?, no leg'a lature which could claim to represent the Colonists or to be entitled to their confidence; but even admitting that there is some foundation for such a charge, we must also give his Excellency cradit for the pains and trouble he tookj to gajn that ascendancy over tha Native mind which he then acquired; how he acquired it I need scarcely inform you He gained it by constantly travelling through the Native districts, by making himself knowiijnofc only to all the influential chiefs, but to their whole tribes; by making, himself by personal intercourse, acquainted with their wishes, their wants and requirements, he gained it by himself explaining tho measures lie proposed for their benefit, he gained it by proving to thorn, that while ho had the courage to set at naught, to run counter to the positive instructions of the Imperial Government, rather than violate any of the obligations imposed upon her Majesty by the treaty of Waitangi, jyet that lie was prepared at any time to put down with a strong arm any attempt to dispute the supremacy of the Crown. He hesitated not to enforce the most exceptional laws and his great triumph undoubtedly was chat he obtained the willing acquiescence of the Natives iti those laws, a triumph which he achieved by satisfying and convincing tho Natives, that they were not merely for the peace, order and good government of the colony, but for their own especial welfare and benefit. Sucii Sir, was the means by which Sir George Grey gained the con fidence of the Natives, and succeeded in reconciling them to British rule. Is it then fair, is it reasonable, is it just, to thrust again upon his Excellency such an Herculean task,aa thatof winning by lug own personal influence, by his own undivided efforts, the Natives back to such allegiance to their Sovereign ; is it consistent in us who have ia times past charged him with having relied solely upon his own personal influence now to insist that he shall pursue precisely the same course that we then so vehemently condemned. Sir, if there is one object at which more than another, we should aim and strive, it is while not ignoring the value of personal influence, of personal attachments to attach the Native to our institutions , to inspire them with tho fullest confidence in the representatives of the colony, to make them in short regard this House "as a tribunal to which they may ever confidently appeal for the removal of their grievances, for the redress of any wrongs they may be suffering. And such is precisely,! believe, the object Sir George Grey has in view in declaring that henceforth her Majesty's representative must begui led in tho ad ministration of Native affairs by Ministers respon sible to this House. But, sir, a refusal on our part to share with his Excellency the responsibility of governing tho .Native race will appear still more monstrous if we for one moment consider' the position of the colony (as regards tho natives) as contrasted with what it was when he quitted it some nine years ago. It will not, bo denied, that Sir George Grey left the natives in 1853, full of thanks and gratitude for his treatment of them — he left them relying with the utmost confidence in the justice and good faith of the British Government — he left them entertaining the most friendly feelinga towards the Colonists, and busily engaged in the pursuits of industry, he left them at the same time impotent for mischief; he left the colony after having by disarming tho Natives rendered a Maori war well nigh impossible. Sir, I need not ask what is the stai© he finds the colony in on hi 3 return. It is, I regret to say, exactly tho reverse of what it was when he left; Throughout tho length and breadth of the land he finds instead of loyalty, — the natives throwing off their allegiance, brimful of distrust and suspicion of the Government— instead of those friendly feelings so long manifested towards the settlers, he finds them almost in spite of themselves coming to regard them as intruders, as possible enemies rather than as friends— he finds the colony, after being plunged into a disastrous war emerging out of it by means ofan inglorious truee — he has to deplore tho ruin and disolation of one of the oldes settlements — a settlement that has gbeen justly termed the garden of New Zealand, and one" which from his long residence in it, he must ever feel a warm interest. He sees before him the prospect of another war of stilllarger dimensions— a war which if onco_ bagun will speedily become a war of races, and will entailjupon every settlement in this island far greater disasters than than havo bofallen unfortunate Taranaki ; and yefc, Sir, this House knowing and admitting all this, recognising all the difficulties of the position, is asked by hon. gentlemen opposito, to refuse his Excellency the only assistance, he seeks and claims, an assistance- which. I repeat he is most fully, most justly entitled, not merely on account of the debt of gratitude which this colony owes him. for services rendered in times past, but still more for the self-sacrificing spirit ho has evinced in giving up the government of one of England's most important dependencies, and in hastening to us at a moment's notice in this our hour of need, of peril and danger. Sir George Grey does not ask you to give him assistance in men and money— ho does not call upon you for a blood |and treasure assistance — for "abloodand treasureexpenditure " — he does not come down ,to this house and threaten you that unless you are prepared to pay a large portion of the expensesofa war, in causing and in the carrying on of which you bavejhad no part, no voice, he will withdraw the troops and leave tho settlers of this Island at any risk to the tender mercies of a race who are smarting under a deep sense of injustice, and whose worst passions havd Jjeen evoked by what they believe a most unjust, wanton, and wicked onslaught on their homes and properties. Such, Sir, is not the kind of assistance that His Excellency seeks at your hands. He makes no demand upon your pockets, but he appoals to tho highest, the noblest faculties of the human mind —to the warmest- feelings of the human heart. He doe 3 not come down to this House to drive a huckstering bargain, but ho says in plain and simple language, " \V ill you share with me the grave responsibilities which the present critical position of the colony entails ? Will you, the representatives of tho people, aid me with your counsel and advice ? Will you, as far as you can, relieve mo of soino of the cares and anxieties incurred for your sake, and for your sake alone ? I will do my duty, are you prepared to perform yours ? Sir, I trust that such an appeal will never be mado to any body of Englishmen, still less to any Representative Legislature, in vain, I do earnestly hope that such an appeal coming from one to whom the Colony is so deeply indebted, will not be spurned and rejected by this House. But should such Sir, unhappily be the case, I for one shall stillcling to the hope that an indignant and outraged country will repudiate and reverse your decision.

Mr. CRACROFT WILSON said that there were three fallacies in the eloquent speech they had just heard. The first was that Sir George Grey needed their advice ; the second, that if they negatived this

resolmion, he would be prevented asking for it • and the third, that the Maoris were not British subjects. If he had read history aright, Sir George Grey was the last man to require advice as to how natives should be managed ; but still if he wished it, the House did not prohibit him from consulting his Ministers. In asking that the Government should be made more powerful, they were not deserting him, but paying him the highest, compliment — one that he deserved for making such sacrifices to come to U3 in our difficulty. -When the Government had brought the natives into the condition of British sulijeets, he (Mr. W.) would be happy for this House to take the sole responsibility of governing them. He would also ietihe House know what were his constituent's opinions of the present state of affairs. They grieved to the heart's core when the subject of Tarau<tki was mentioned, and they thought that one sole undivided power was the power to put a stop to present difficulties (hear, hear). They would be very happy to see the voice of this House closed for a time with reference to native affairs ; that the Governor should be allowed to exercise his judgment unfettered by the opinions of others, especially of any " party. '' Making him dictator for a time, they should return to their homes, and if next year the words " Turanaki avenged and restored, ' should staud at the top of His Excellency's ad 1 dress, his constituents would be perfectly satisfied-

Mr CARLETON regretted that the native ques-. tiou shcu'd have been choaen as the subject for the first trial of strength in the House. There was plenty of other battle ground, and he had hoped that upon this question all would have united with the common object of doing the best for the colony irrespectively of party. The raising that question had placed the House in a false position. The House was in a state of anarchy, for it contained three parties, and by no possible division could the real opinions ,of members be expressed. Tlie challenge ought not to have been given by the opposition, and ought not to have been accepted by the Government. In order to clear away some of the confusion which had beset the question, he would ask the House to go back with him to the time when the question of Ministerial Responsibility was first raised, in 185 i. One of the arguments most strongly insisted upon was this — that ParJiamentary government was required for the good of the native race. Nothing had been done for them under Governor's government, exceptiug the establishment of certain schools, which he (Mr. C.) regretted to say, had been more or less a failure. True, the natives had been petted and cajoled, and merely kept quiet for the time; but they had been much demoralized, losing their savage virtues without acquiriug European ones. They had lose that habit of rigid adherence to agreements, which they had been so honourably distinguished iv former times ; and thi3 through the direct action of the Government, which had gone so far as to p«y them for repudiating their engagements. It w«a time for the colonists to take the natives in hand themselves. All this had beea stated much more strongly and ably by the hon. member Mr. Fox himself, in the debate on the Waitara question, (Did it was remarkable the hon. member, Dr. Featherston, who now held such different views did not on that occasion say a word to the contrary. The next occasion of the question of responsibility in native matters being mooted was in the session of 1856. Governor Browne desired to except native matters from the agreement with ministers, And the Auckland members supported him in this unanimously, but not as objecting to the principle of parliamentary goverament in Native matters. Their reasons wjre of a local and temporary nuture only. They looked to the possibility of an exclusively Southern ministry coming- in, entirely ignorant in native matters, ati'l legislating rashly on a subject which was vital to the Province of Auckland. He had since had misgivings about the course he then pursued, feeling sure that if the admirable native policy proposed by ministers iv 1858 had been carried out, no war could have arisen. The third occasion of the question being raised was the present one. There svere three courses open to pursue and accordingly three parties the House. The first course was to place native matters entirely un dci* the control of responsible ministers. Of course that would presently have to be done, and it would be well had it beeu done at first, but he agreed with Mr. Fox that just now was not the time. He agreed w ith that hon. member that hai they a tabula rasa before them, they would have been bound to tai;e upon themselves the whole duty of educating and governing the natives, and also of providing for the defence of the colony, iiuc difficulties, for which the colonists were not responsible, ought to be first cleared away The second course was to leave native matters entirely in the hands of the Governor for the present, To that he was favourable, but not on the grounds imputed by Mr. Fitzgerald, that "we refused to come forward to say what our constitutional position was because of the expense. H« disclaimed all niggardly feeling in the matter. The House had promised men and money last session ; he was sure that there was not a single member in the House who would go bade from such a promise once made. Still the fact remained, that we owed nothing for the expenses of a war not of our own creation ; and when the amount of our contribution came to be considered, he would wish to see it kept down as low as possible — not because he grudged it, but because the resources of the colony were limited, and he would desire to see every stiver that could be spared applied to the relief of those who might be called the outcasts of the colony — the Tavauaki settlers. The third course open was that proposed by the ministry, namely the middle course between the two former. He had an iusiiuctive dislike to middle courses and to tha most worldly of maxims, madio lutissimus ibis. Itt might shew caution and prudence to do so, but. men of high feeling knew thar truth and right mostly lay in one extreme or the other. He objected to ministers dividing responsibility with the Governor. The Governor would get all the credit imd they would get all the blame. He had heard of a man who agreed to divide the Louse with his wife, and he did so by giving her the outside, and keepiug the inside himself. Moieover.if the House we.c dissatisfied with the management of native affairs they would not kuow whom to blame. The Governor could throw the blame on the Ministry, and they could cast it back upon him. He (Mr. O.) could not agree with the terms of the ministerial resolution. But this was not the real question for i he House to decide that day. There were two very different questions before the House that day — the one a matter of mere opinion, what course would be best to pursue; the other, whether ministers ought to be supported in the o ourse they had thought proper to elect. Considering they were put into ofiice for the purpose of settling the native question, considering the complication and embarrassment of it, considering that the difficulties under which they laboured were none of their own raising he would concede to them, within reasonable limits, the right to choose their own course and on »hat ground would give tin* in a favorable vote. But something yet, remained. He was willing that ministera should ohoose the terms of responsibility, but insisted that the House had a right to know, accurately and precisely, what those terms were to be. Now the speech of the hon. msmber, Mr. Fox, had only made the ministerial resolution harder to imdeestand than it was before. It was, obscurum per obscurious. [The hon. member went on to 1 shew that the Governor, in his despatch of Sept. 30 1801, had informed the Home Government that had arranged to put native matters on the same footing as ordinary Colonial matters, without any reserve, making ministerial responsibility complete ; and that the hou. member at the head of the Government had misunderstood the despatch.] He (Mr. C.) required more black and white in coming to an arrangement with the Governor; If there were any misunderstanding he would assure those hon. members on the ministerial benches that they would not get the best of it. How many of our difficulties had arisen for want of definite and positive agreements with Governors. Let the House take warning from the miaunaemajQcUng of the boa. member for Elles-

m?re with Governr Wynyard, in 1854 ; also from the result of tbe late Government going beyond the terms of the memorandum of 1856, in advising the Governor on questions of war or peace. The consequence was, that the war had been called a settlers war, iucurred for the sake of Commissariat expenditure. A more calumnious statement had never keen made ; but unfortunate the foulness 'of a calumny did not hinder its defusion. Yet, it was so easy to give absolute proof that interested motives had nothing- to do with the war. The majority ! of die rnrm'.iers for the northern island, which might have profited by UommUsiariat expenditure," were opposed to the war ; while the war policy was forced by the members from the middle island, who could not have profitted one shilling, but, on the contrary, were saddling their own island with a heavy loud of debt. Yet in spite of these two warnings, ministers were again about to enter into an imperfect arrangement with the Governor. And even the nature of that was only half expained. He would give the hon. member, Mr. Fox, an opportunity to explain more fully in reply, by acking three definite questions, to which lie hoped definite answers would be given. Firstly, what had become of the memorandum of 1856? Was it still in force j had it been altered or departed from ; and if not, had a fresh memorarulum'of agreement between the Governor and his responsible advisars been made ? Secondly, how far dii ministers think the executive oatli applied to native matters ? The late Government thought it bound them to advise the Governor on native questions of war and peace. It was a question of casuistry and (and casuistry did not always deserve the bad name under which it laboured) ; he, for his own part thought that the memorandum of 1856 relieved them from the obligation. In that, the Governor stated that "he would be happy to receive their advice," in certain matterai through not bound to act upon it. Now the Governor would not have need tor such a paralogism as to state his willingness to receive what it was compulsory on ministers to offer. The third query was, whether ministers were made acquainted with all that took place by way of correspondence with the home government — whether any " secret and confidential despatches were sent home, which ministers were not allowed to see. He believed that such things had been done in the time of the last miuistry, and he wished to know whether the system was continued. To conclude, he had stated liis objectiuns to the resolutions before the House; he had also stated why he thought those objections insufficient co hinder him from voting with the government on that occasion. The difficulties under which they labored were not of their own creating, and he desired to allow them fair play. He thought that neutrals, and those who desired to leave native affairs in the hands of the Governor, could oonsistentlydo the same ; and as those who had created the difficulties, he thought it would be wise In them to exercise a generous forbearance (ch«ers). Mr. DOMETT, after referring to the speech of the hon. member who last addressed the House, expressed his dissent from the resolution. He said it was an abnegation of their rights and dereliction from their duties. The hon. member made an eloquent appeal to the generous spirit of the House to assist His Excellency, and share his anxieties, and if the speech was as well reported, and made to read as well as it was delivered, he hoped this paltry resolution would be put at the end of it. If this were done the reader would be forcibly reminded of those glass ornaments in which, some small insect was sometimes incased, and would exclaim with the poet — 1 ' The tiling itself is neither rich nov rare.

One wonders how the devil it got there." They would recall the story 'told by Albert Smith of the pedlars at Constantinople, who went about the streets exclaiming in solemn aacents — •• There is but one God and Mahomet is his prophet," and concluded by offering for sale dry figs (a laugh). Tfie resolution after the solemn speech was a very dry fig. (Roars of laughter.) They could not get the whole responsibility. The Home Government would not listen to it. He could scarcely look with any great seriousness upon the remark that if Sir G. Grey disagreed with his ministers, he would appeal to this House— it the House disagreed with Sir G. Grey, he would ask what would be the result ? They ought to look upon the Governor in their Executive as the representative of the people of England. In questions of Imperial interest he should have the decision. The Colonial Executive would in such matters give way to the Governor as a minority to a majority. If the ministry differed from the House they should appeal to the Governor, and if they differed from the Governor the appeal should be made to the Parliament — that was- in matters of colonial interest. He was, therefore, totally opposed to assuming authority over matters which England alone should control. He would simply content himself with voting agaimt the resolution. He did not object so much to the resolution itself as to the arguments that had been used in favour of it, (laughter). Mr. WATT said lie did not desire that this should be a party movement, or that Ministers should resign if their motion was negatived. He considered the present resolution unreal. The Governor had been represented as appealing to the House to allow him Responsible Government, but it appeared to him that Ministers had themselves, armed with the resolution of last session , insisted on having a certain amount of action n the matter. Ho wished the House to treat Native matters as an open question, and he thought Ministers had made a mistake in laying on the table memoranda on particular points affecting the relations between themselves and the Governor. He wished to know whether the Ministry were determined to stand 01 fall by their resolution, as if they were he hoped some hon. member would move the previous question.