DEBATE ON NATIVE LANDS BILL IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Wellington Independent, Volume XVII, Issue 1763, 6 September 1862, Page 2

DEBATE ON NATIVE LANDS BILL IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Monday, Auoxjst 25,, 1862. •. v ' » V— M^^M t , C*'.'- /*.""* '.'l-1 • The hon. D. BELL in moving the second reading of the Native Lands Bill, said . Mr. SPEAKER, it will be in the recollection of the House that when, a few days ago, I moved the first reading of this Bill I explained shortly the prihcipleupon which the measure waß founded, and invited the careful reflection of hon. members upon the great change which' it proposed to institute in the relations existing between the Government and the natives of New Zealand, on the subject of their lands, I hope, Sir, the time which has been allowed to elapse since then, rather a long time, but one which the Government were most ready to give in order that the House might have the opportunity of devoting their attention to the subject, has enabled hon. members to arrive at some clear conclusion as to the principle which is involved in this measure, Sir, it is no small matter which government now propose for the consideration of the House; it is no small matter for them to ask the House now to reverse the policy which has guided the Qojerniniimt in its relations to the natives on the Land question for the last twenty years and totakb a step which, however firmly we ousel ves believe that, it will conduce alike to the maintenance of peacefulrelations with the natives, and to the prosperity and' wealth of the, whole of : the inhabitants of the North Island, the government do not conceal from themselves is pregnant of most important consequences, and. demands the most deliberate consideration : froni all the members of this House. Sir, I propose, as briefly as the nature of the subject will allow me, to bring before the House the

principle upon which we base our proceedings, its main objects, and what we believe will be the resuit; and I hope tiiac in the Ci>useof to-ni^hb lion, members having the opportu lity of meeting in a fair and open way the arguments which I ■shall adduce to the House, will do so, not with reference to the particular machinery of the Bill, but with reference to its -leading principle. For I wuTacknowleilge at the outset, that while the Government are by no means wedded to the exact form by which effect shall be given to that principle, and will readily accept any well considered amendments for the same end, they take their stand upon the principle itself. The points therefore to which I shall address myself are such as will be immediately ascertainabls, and it is upon these that we 6hall seek the decision of the House. The first is very simple, though it is -sweeping enough. I ask you to declare that all land over which the .Native title is not extinguished, is the absolute, property of the persons entitled to it by native custom and that after their ownership has been ascertained and registered, the proprietors may deal, -with it in like manner as her Majesty's subjects of European race may deal with land by them under Grant from the Crown. That, Sir, is in. a few words the principle of the Bill, I hope, however, that hon. members who see me standing" here as - a minister and bringing down such a measure, will Hot mistake the position which his Excellency's advisers take in the matter. We do not pretend tocouie down to this House and ask its assont to a new policy of our own, or to accept Jrom. us a proposal which might or might not afterwards (as in the case of the Territorial Rights Bill of 1858,) receive the assent of the Governor. We propose it as one 1 means of giving practical effect to the Native ■Policy of his Excellency Sir George Grey, and it is with the highest gratification that 1 am enabled to announce to the House that the principle involved in the Bill, viz , Mat the natives shall be allowed to have as good a title to their lands as the Europeans have to theirs, and that they should in the event of their disposing of or renting their land, be allowed to obtain the value of that land, hasreceived his Excellency's assent. (Loud cheers) Sir, the doctrine of tlit'e' Native ownership is no new doctrine. It is old as the agreement by which British Sovereignty in these Islands was established, for the rule of the Tieaty of Waitanga, the rule by which that document is to be inpreted which gives us,oaf stand points towards the natives, has been laid down on the high authority of a gentleman, whose opinion is not only to be received with respect on points of law, but whose opinion derives additional value from the special means which he has had of acquiring during more than twenty years residence in these Islands, a knowledge of the sense in which the Treaty was accepted by tha Native people themselves. Chief Justice Martin, of whom 1 speak, laid down the rule of the Treaty of Waitanga to be this " all lands in New Zealand which have any owners, according to Native custom still bolong to those owners ; while p!1 lands which have no owners fall to the Crown by virtue of the cession of Sovereignty." And this rule of interpretation is consistent with the_doctrine laid down by Chief Justice Story on the subject of the title of the Indians on the continent ot" North America, "Their right," says that distinguished juiist, 14 whatever it was, ofoccupataiion or us, stood upon original principles deducible fiom the law of nature, and could not justly be narrowed or extin. guished without their own free consent. There is no doubt that the Indian tribes inhabiting this continent at the time of its discovery, maintained a claim to the exclusive possession and occupancy of the territory within their respective limitsas sovereign and absolute proprietor of the soil. They acknowledge no obedience or allegiance; or subordination to any foreign sovereign, whatsoever ; and as far as they have possessed the means, they have ever since asserted their plenary ri<*ht of dominion, and yielded' it up, only when lost by the superior force of conquest, or transferred by voluntary cession." ' T W c have always recognised "in them the native ownership ; the question now before us, is , whether we shall give up the Crown's absolute rig'rJLJ; of preemption, and in practice allow the Natives to obtain the full benefit of that ownership., , I bhall show the House, that to do so will only be to take a step to which the opinions expressed by vaiious public officersthe discussions which have taken place in this House, and above all, the events of the last few years, have naturally,. led up- until the time has become ripe for its adoption. Now, Sir, in the original announcement which Sir G. Grey made on his arrival here of the policy upon which he proposed to conduct the affairs of the country, all hon members will have seen two clear leading ideas; one, that it was to provide some form of Government for the natives themselves, and the other, that means should simultaneously be adopted for opening up the country by releasing under proper safeguard the restrictions on the disposal of Native lands. Sir G. Grey's proposal in October, 18GI, was this, — " So soon as the boundaries and ownership of any lau,d in a district have been ascertained and defined in accordance with the regulations of the Runanga, and have been registered in the Civil Commissioner's Office and approved by the Government, the Native owners will be permitted to dispose of any such lands or parts of such lands,(not exceeding the extent of , one farm), by direc: sale to any purchaser who may be approved of by the Government, on the recommendation of the Runanga, on such conditions as may be agreed, on between the sellers and purchasers." Although the conditions which the G..vernor proposed to attach to such sales, viz : personal residence of the purchaser for three years, under a. psnaljty, called lorth. the respectful remonstrance of his then ' Ministers, they agreed with the Governor 4in principle ; and T will read an extract from the Minute addressed to the Government by hon.. friend the member for Rangitiki (Mr. Fox), in reply -to His Excellency's -proposal, from which the House will seel hat at ■that time there was, . no real difference belwen my hon. friend's \yiews and mine. In this Minute, the late Cd/onial Secretary used the following words—*' \Vlien a title has been so ascertained in any particular case, and the Governor satisfied of the fact, it is submitted that the Natives should then be left to hold, sell,.lease, or otherwise dispose r .a£ their, lands, in such manner as they might themselves choose." Sir, these are words which I might myself have chosen to explain the principle of the Bill now before the House. But the same thing" was declared in nearly identical terms, in the documents'circulated by our predecessors, with the Governor's authority, among the vaiious tribes, before the Governor';* visit to Waikato last December, when his Excellency held his first meeting with the tribes of the interior. One of the objects which that circular stated'iV to be the desire of the Queen of England to cany out, was — "That every man should have for himself and enjoy his own lands, his cattle, his' horses, his sheep, his Bhip, his money, or whatever else belongs to him " Further, at that meeting at Waikato, the Governor himself said in one of his Excellency's speeches :— " I propose therefore now, that wherever people live in considerable numbers, the island should be divided into districts, and runangas appointed tormake laws for them, and to determine if roads are to made, and what share of the expenses the people have to pay. They will also determine the ownership and boundaries of land, and if it may be. sold, and by whom." < (Cheers ) But, Sir, these proposals were not imniature schemes which had not been carefully considered beforehand. The Governor who initiated, and the ministers who advised them, were

pursuing a policy which had already been theauhject . of many debates het.e, and had received the ImGovernment'^ .approval. In the debate of , June 1861 in this ijouse,, on the JLand Purchase

Ordinance, the hon. jnember for Rangitiki, speak.ing of the land quefttion, and the. occupation of ;' lands by Europeans, said — "The question •rVas'now become onp c . of, enormous importance, ■*: ftf though dsteniabjy the penalties were onlyj in.

flictcd upon Europeans, it- did involve the Natives' right to do with their lands as they thought propar, and the Natives were fully alive to tliia, and,complained greatly of the action of the Government with reference to their lands. The time was come, when the Natives must have the right ta dispose of their lands one way or another." That was before my bon. friend the member for Ringitikei had come into office. When afterwards I called the attention of the Government to the question, the hon. gentleman made this statement as Minister (3rd September) — " We are convinced that the foundation of our present unsatisfactory relations with the natives is the suspicion which exists in their minds that wo desire to take their lands. This suspicion must be removed at any cost, and we propose, as the first step towards its removal, to stop all purchasing of lands till some equitable system shall have been agreed to between, as ; but when we shall gave settled some equitable system, then, as lienata says, there will be no difficulty about sell- , ing land ; the natives who wish to sell, will sell j and no one will meddle with them." Not very long before, the Bishop of New Zealand had said, speaking of the inconveniences resulting from the state of the "land question. " The remedy appears to be simple ; viz : — an unqualified recognition of the native land title, to the fullest extent, and with every legal security that would be given to any landed proprietor of our own race." Above all, the proposals made by Governor Sir George Grey were not made without the previous sanction o" the Imperial Gove E'nent. In iiis despatch of the sth June, 1861, written before Sir George had left the Caps, the Duke of Newcastle writes thus — " I have not yefc alluded particularly to our most important portion of the subject, closely connected with the origin of the present disturbances; I mean the system under which the purchase of native land now and ought to be iv future con • ducted. You will direct your earliest attention to this subject, examining whether the system of negociation between the agents of the Government and the native owners, though in conformity with the Treaty of Waitangi and for many years successful, may not in the present condition of the natives and the settlers, require to be modified or superceded. * * Her Majesty's Government will accordingly be willing to assent to any pru--dent plan for the individualisition of native title and for direct purchase under proper safeguards, of native lands by individual settlers, which the New Zealand Parliament may wish to adopt." Sir, I have proved a concurrence of high authority upon this matter and I will not trouble the House with evidence of my own opinions for a long time past upon it. Honorable members who have had pesonal communications with me upon Native affairs know perfectly will, that the opinions which I have just read, are those which I for one entertain, and which I and others have for a long time endeavoured to bring into a temperate and prudent form before the pnblic mind. So far, I have spoken with respect to the prinsiple objects of this Bill. I will now ask the attention of the House for a tew moments, to a point of less importance, and yet one worth consideration, because Ido not doubt that our pro. posal will be contracted in the course of this debate, with the propos il submitted by the late Government, and an which the hon. member for Rangitiki based his Native policy speech, and -at the commencement of. the session, one point of difference between his proposal and ours is this, that we desire, subject to proper safeguards, that the Natives themselves should bej empowered to ascertain and define their own titles, and we therefore propose to constitute courts, which after a proper survey, a careful enquiry, and confirmation of their pjoceedings by tiie Governor, shall have the power of certifying who, according to Native customs, are the owners of any land. The question of Jurisdiction by which the Crown through the Governor or some executive officer or court has claimed to take a part in the ascertainment and determination of Native title, and upon which therefore we may rightly legislate, was settled when the Queen's sovereignty was established in these islands. In the first instructions given to Governor Hobson on the 28th June, 1841, Her Majesty's Government proposed, that the Commissioners whom they proposed to send out, should "be invested with an effectual and summary jurisdiciio i for^detennining controversies regarding land, whichmight arise between different tribes, or between different mem' are of the same tril.e." Later.in the Royal instructions of 184-6, issued after careful enquiry as to the course that should be puraued^Lord Grey laid down the following rule — " The Protector of Aborigines shall transmit to the Governor, a statement of the extent and locality of all the lands to which any Natives, either a3 tribes or inidviduals, claim cither a proprietary or a possessory title ; which claims shall forthwith be provisionally registered. A Land Court shall be held in eaoh district' for investigating and deciding on the accuracy and validity of such negotiations, which Court snail be competent to decide on the accuracy and validity -thereof, both as between the i claimant on the one hand, and us in right of our Crown on the other hand, and as between different claimants "asserting opposite and incompatible titles to the same lands." Sir, the proposal of my hon, friend, the member for Kangitikei, in his Native Land Bill, was to continue in the Governor ' the power of determining Native title . we propose instead, 'to constitute Courts to ascertain, define and register the native ownership ; after which the owners should be relieved from the restrictions we have placed upon them for the last twenty years ai to the disposal of their land. But it is not merely for a sentimental admission of the ! full rights of ownership that the Government now ask your assent to this measure. We believe that by asserting the principle, we should do more than the whole course of our policy for the last twenty years has done to remove the secret causes of jealousy and distrust which have been at work in the Native bind and which are the acknowledged sources of the Maori King movement. We belief that if you can once substitute for tho sense of uncertainty, as to what are the real intentions of the Government, the knowl edge that being admitted to possess a boundless oxtent of territory as their absolute property, the Native people will also be allowed to obtain the full benefit of that wealth; you will have struck at the root of the ajitation by which so many"' tribes have been seducad from their allegiance to the <3 u e en i : and of the danger arising out of their having set up a King of their own. Sir, it is vain to hope that you will revive the Native confidence in you by the mere offer of political institutions, (hear, hear.) No re.iuer of history will say that barbarians coming in contact with a conquering or civilizing race can be gained over by mere forms of Government. You may stimulate the political activity of village Bunangas, but unless you can at the same time secure their attachment by some bondofcommoninterestandprovethatthis bond is the best guarantee for their own prosperity and wealth, you have de»«to*l.e towards bridging the gulf, that separates the civilised man and the barbarian. The only means by which you can produce a lasting effect upon the Natives is by proving to them that it is not merely a matter of sentiment for them to own allegience to British authority and, submit themselves to British law, but that it is a matter of the greatest material interest to them, to do it, and that if they do it they will infallibly themselves become wealthy men. The grievance they complain of is, that the more land they sell, the mote they become impoverished, and it is a matter of fact, that in those places where most territory has been ceded to the Crown chieftainship ha 3 most declined. This arises simply and naturally from the one great mistake, we have made in always trying to give them the least price they would accept for their land, in order that we might ourselves get the greatest prico we could by its sale (cheers). If you had said at the commencement that the Crbwn would sejl the Native land on a plan to secure the advancement of the race, as was done by the United States, iv one case a few years ago

where au iminensejsum (if I remember right, mor< than £100,U30) was obtained and invested for tht benefit of a particular tribe, you would have had no distrusi or dissatisfaction in the Native mind ; but by always buying from them (on the pretence that you wanted land for the purpo.se of colonization) without making provision, at least in the north Island, for their own improvement, you have at last brought the Natives to believe that your real object is to impoverish and degrade them. But if you now reverse policy and allow them to receive the full benefit of their immense wealth in land, you will, I firmly believe, promote colonization when you at the same time revive the confidence of the other race. There was another plan open to you at the first, by which you might have secured their confidence, you might perhaps have started originally and it may be, that you could even do it now by purchasing the allegiance of the Natives, by some such system as has been pursued elsewhere, at the Cape or in French colonies, for instance that of granting large pensions to the principle chiefs, and securing their allegience, by interesting them in the annual receipt of a fixed income. It is all very well to say this is bribery ; but if you had started with that originally, you might have been able to avoid recognizing among the natives a higher title than has been recognized as belonging to savages, by sovereign powers before, and you nright have practically get possession of the country through the influence of the chiefs in the various districts. It would have been another way of proving to them that colonisation meant wealth to them as well as for you. Ido not say that would have been the better plan, nor do I say it would not, neither .do I mean to say that even now if you could see your way to the great chiefs assent to such a a scheme, you might not. buy your way into the land at the price of a great annual grant for : pensions. Which, however, would be a trifle ! compared with the value of the territory itself. But the time has come when one way or another | you must pay for the land, if you are to have it ; pay, I mean, its full value, there is no other course open to you but to divest yourself of the idea that you have a reversionary interest in the land for your own benefit, and to allow that the benefit shall go to the people to whom the land now belongs. You must do one thing or the other, either say you have a reversionary interest in the land for purposes ot colonisation, and that as one way of getting it peaceably, you will grant large incomes to the chiefs, or let the native owners have the full value of it themselves, and let them sell it to any one for as much as they can get. But, Sir, it is said that the Bill will be a land sharking measure, (hear, hear) ; that it will destroy syste-' malic colonisation, that it will reduce some of the Provinces toj Bankruptcy ; that it it is violation of the fiuancial settlement of 1856 ; that if we give to the Natives these rights they must also be subject ta taxation equally with ourselves. I will shortly endeavour to dispose of these objections to the principle which we propose to adopt. Sir, what is the meaning of land sharking ? We have heard a great deal of what was said in the times of our ignorance of the claimants under purchases made irom the Natives before the Treaty. I lemeraber a great many years ago, when I was working with the first band that founded the southern coioiii-

sation of these islands, we used to thinkthe people who hadboughtlandlrom the Natives in the north were a set of land sharks, whose enormous claims were destructive io the future welfare of that part of New Zealand. I have sincelearnt better, experience has taught rae B that there were, on the whole, no fairer or more complete transfers of Native title ever made in New Zealand than those under which the first settlers at the Bay of Islands and the North, made their purchases irom the natives and the time has gone by when those transactions could bequot-

Ed as instances of what laud shacking in New Zealand means. I think that system may as fairly be called '• land sharking" (if the term is to be used in this way at all), by which in one Province a runholder may obtain an estate of 100,000 acroj of finely grassed land by paying os. an acre for it, (hear, hear) ; it is just as mucli " land sharking'" for a man in another Province to hold a run of 400,000 acres with a fourteen years lease to the absolute exclusion of the public from any right to buy ; just as much " land sharking" wnere you may buy agricultural laud at ss. an acre on one side of a river and on the other side of the river the mere right of occupation of the land under » pasture license will fetch nearly aa much. There is, strictly speaking, as much " land sharking possible under the actual land laws of New Zealand as is likely to take place in Native Districts under this measure. But suppose it were otherwise ? Suppose a man with a quarter of a million ot money could go in and buy the whole of the Waikato with it. I say he would be doing a great benefit to the country, I say that it would produce more results in the union of the two races to have title extinguished by one man, and the country occupied as it would be by the thousands wlio would go into it, even if that man made another quarter of a million profit, than the present system will produce which prevents the title being extinguished at all. There is more than one man now in the country possessing as his private estate from 50,000 to 100,000 acres for which he has paid an amount of money quite trifling compared to its present value and to the income it produces him to-day. When therefore you call this Bill a " land sharking" proposal you are running away with the idea that it gives an inordinate advantage to a small number of speculators, now that has nothiug to do with the question. If the result will be to give advantage to particular Europeans it must also give large sums to the natives themselves, all of which will come back™ to you in your trade. But I deny that there is any prospect of individual speculators acquiring a great amount of territory. I believe that by the operation of such a principle aa this, there will be such an amount of competition among intending European buyers, such an effect on the Europeans and Natives from the immutable laws of supply or demand, that the mere land shark (if you must give a nickname to any speculator iv laud) would get an extremely small advantage, compared with the advantages got by the large number of people whose capital and enterprise would be directed to the purchase of native lands. With respect to the objection, that a proposal like this is destructive of systematic I do not believe one word of it. x >Y**-b,ave seen what your right of pre-emption has done iv the Waikato, at Taranaki. at jManawatu, and elsewhere. With all your principles of systematic colonisation, you have net been able to get the land on which to colonise, what do you mean by the words. Do you seriously intend never to en-

ablethe Europeans to become mixed with the Nativesinthe Native districts? I say ifyou will let them do it, if you will let them become first ploughera of land, then makers of roads, then builders of villages, churches, and schools, in purely Native territory, you will have a more " systematic colonisation," than that which allows whole districts to be destroyed by thistles, which creates vast estates for great sheepowners, and which has not saved you from having your own land which you bought and cultivated, being conquered and held by a handful of insurgent Natives. (Cheers). But the most ser ousiargument I have heard as being likely to be advanced against this Bill, is that it will be bankruptcy to some of the provinces ; v\ ellington for instance. (Cries of no, no, and hear, hear.) I hope that argument will not be brought forward against the Bill, but if it is, I shall have the opportunity of meeting it when I reply upon the debate. But I wish to take this opportunity of repeating, that the Government will be ready to receive from members representing the Northern Island provinces, and to give every possible effect to any proposals having for their object, to prevent any breach of faith with regard to arrangements now pending, any contracts for sale oi otherwise of land, in which the Provincial Governments are already engaged. I shall myself propose a clause, by which all con- . tracts and penJing negotiations will be saved, so that this law shall not put a atop to anything

3 J actually undertaken on the part of a province. 5 1 Hut if it shall be contended, as I understand it ■ < will be, that because there are several blocks in ; I course of session, or under engagement to be i , ceded, the Native land outside, ought to be en- , tirely excepted from the operation of the Bill, then : I say at once, that after giving the question their most . j serious consideration, and after giving their best attention to the views advocated very temperately and fairly by the deputations which came to see us on Saturday and waited upon the Governor to day, His Excellency's advisers will not be able ! to accept an amendment in the Bill, striking so directly at its principle. They will not be able to say, that the object, being to recognise to the fullextent the Native ownership ; it is not ex pedient in certain portions of the country so to recognise it; but it is not only as a matter of right and wrong we say so. If, by the principle of this Bill, you give the Natives the incideuts of ownership, it will be perfectly vain to tell them, that you will admit that principle in the province of Auckland, but deny it in Wellington. (Cheers). The province of Wellington would gain nothing by such a course; for the Natives, knowing that the principle had been recognised in the North, would cease to sell land to the Crown here, on any other system, but would not cease to demand the same benefit to be extended to them everywhere. They would come to this House and to th» Governor and ask " upon what rule of right or justice, do you lay it down, that we who have been loyal and friendly are to be excluded from the conces sions, you are ready to grant to people who have given you all your trouble ? " The result could only be, that after having ourselves taken the contemptible course of setting up a principle here, and then agreeing to strike it down; the Natives would come ,to this House, with a demand which in the long run, no one could resist. I hope therefore, that hon. members, representing Wei lington, who may think, that the Government have arrived at a decision adverse to their provincial interests, will admit, that in coming to the conclusion I have stated, that we have been guided by the feeling, that it would perfectly futile to propose, that the principle should be declared in one place and not in another. But, Sir, another objection which I am told will be urged against the Bill, is that it interferes with the financial settlement of 185(i. Now no one in this House, I venture to say has taken a greater interest than I have in the" maintenance of that financial settlement, and on more than one occasion, I have done violence to my inclination as a parly man by voting against my own party, on questions when I thought that settlement was in danger of being disturbed ; and if it could fairly be said, that this Bill interferes with that settlement, then 1 should have been very unwilling to give it my advocacy ; but do not let us have any nonsense upon this matter, let us fairly look at wnat was the basis of the financial settlement of 1806, in order to see whether any dealing with the Native lands can justly be said to be.a violation of it, and I particularly wish that my hon. friend the member ofßangitiki would do me the favor to consider this point him self, because I maintain that if the financial settlement of 1856 is interfered with by our Bill, it must equally have been interfered with by the

Bill which my hon. frie id himself proposed, or by the scheme of my hon. friend the member for Ellesmere (Mr. FitzGerald), or in fact, by any proposal whatever on the subject of Native lands. Sir, the question in dispute in 1856 were purely territorial questions. Ihe promises of the Middle Island had by a series of successful operations acquired the whole of the Native territory there ; in the Provinces of the North Island on the contrary, by far the greater part of the land remained in the undisturbed possession of the

Natives. Now, under the Constitution Act, the revenue derived from the sale of land was liable to be applied to the purchase of Native territory . and the particular poiut raised in 1856 waa really this, whether the territorial revenue of the Mid.ile Island ought to continue to be liable to appropriation at the Governor's pleasure for the exclusive benefit of the North Islaud. That was the whole question involved in the settlement of 1856. We all knew perfectly well that there had been a certain amount of debt incurred by the Colony for general purposes and we proposed that this should be borne by the whole Colony. We knew perfectly well that there was another debt imposed upon us by thn Parliament, and that we had no choice left to us as to paying the New Zealand Company. We knew perfectly well that except in the Territorial revenue of the South, wo had no money available for the purchase of Native lands. The mode of adjustment by which theae public burdens were allocated between the Middle and North Islands was entirely subordinate to the veal question involved, viz : the liberation of the Middle Island land fund. The land fund was liberated, but I deny that there was any contract implied or expressed, that no legislation * should take place or arrangements entered into between the natives and this House, with respect to the territory not ecded in 1856, and I deny that an}' principle which this House may determine to apply for the purchase and acquisition of that territory does in any way affect the bond between the two islands underthat financial settlement. We have constantly objected to legislating on the subject of the waste lands, lest the settlement should be disturbed and the engagements between the two islands reversed ; but it hag never been said that dealing with the naiiva lands in the colony would be an infraction of that agreement. On the contrary there has hardly been since 1856, a single session without some Bill dealing with the native lands, or some scheme a9 to how they should be dealt with ; yet never was it said by any one that legislation on the subject was an infraction of the financial settlement. Indeed I am at a loss to sup. pose how this can for a moment be argued ; and I must be content to wait for arguments on the subject before I can profess to meet them, all I can say is this, I have taken a deep interest in the question for years, having represented a North Island constituency at the time of the settlement, and recognised the justice of its principles and having lost my seat, mainly, I believe in consequence of my vote on that occasion, and 1 shall be curious to see how it will be argued by my hon. friend opposite, (Mr. Fox), that his Bill was not equally an infraction of the settlement. Why he there admitted the right of the natives to propose plaus to the Government for a colonisation quite apart from the' Provincial Governments, or the claims of any province, and though he avoided recognising in express terms the native title, ho provide for native colonisation

schemes, when the money was to go into no Provincial cheat whatever. If any plan could be at all said to bo (which J deny) at variance with the financial settlement ot 1856, it would boa plan deliberately excluding frdm the ordinary Provincial Revenue, tha purchase money derived from the sale o whole tracts of Native territory under schemes of colonization concluded between the Natives, andf the Government without referrence to the provinces,^ hear hear). But, Sir, it is said, that if you give the Natives the right of ownership you must also tell them them at the same time that they are liable to be taxed, (hear, hear); that' if you say the land is their own and they may derive large sums of money by leasing or "selling ,it, it js high time they should pay taxes, in return for these rights and privileges, (hear hear). That is perfectly fair, I believe myself that there would be no difficulty whatever raised on the part of the Natives to being taxed lor tho maintenance of roads through their districts, and the improvement of the country they retain, if you wili let them have the value of what they sell ; but it is not in this House, that it will be advanced, that the Provincial Governments or ourselves should proceed directly to tax the Natives without their being represented, (hear hear) ; when they should be adequately represented, it will be ample time to talk about taxing them by direct taxation, and when that time comes I believe you will have

no more punctual taxpayers in the country if their money is used for the improvement of their their districts. The Natives are extraordinarly shrewd in these matters, and if they see you want the money for the benefit of the district with which they are concerned, I do "not think you will have any difficulty in getting it. But I confess, I think you will have difficulty in maintaining, for a long period of years your practice of making the land uind, the pocket into which you dive tor the ordinary expenses of government; and I certainly do not believe, you will get the Natives to sell, even if the Europeans see that it will be for their advantage to contribute large sums of money, in the way of taxes not returned to the land in the shape of public improvements, (hear hear), lieturn it in that way to them and you would then have no more difficulty than you have in collecting rates levied by the local boards upon the Europeans. Sir, greater objections than any I have noticed yet, will be advanced against the Bill ; and with the more show of reason, that it is an argument which it is hardly possible for any government to meet by any solid reply except the one of long convictions and perfect faith. It may be said, that we are running considerable risk and danger of opening up the country to irregular contracts between Europeans and Natives, of repeating the difficulties which have been stated to have occurred in contracts made by Natives and Europeans in the old land claims ; but there are only two things which I think deserve consideration, in the first place my experience as Laud Claims Commissioner, has convinced me, that there is no practicable danger in the ascertaining of title transferred by the Natives to Europeans. I have seen nearly half a million acres aujudicated upon in the Land Claims Court, and the risk has faded into thin air by a little management ; but in. the second place, I ask have you by the past policy avoided disputes and dangers ? Has the course you have hitherto pursued by means of a long list of trained officials, by an organised system, extending over more than twenty years, with all the, safeguards that could be supposed to exist in a thorough knowledge of Native customs, and in the high qualification of Mr. McLean and some of his assistants, saved you from dangers and difficulties ? I do not wish to allude to the war at Waitara, or to renew here, the discussions on what took place there; I know that in this House, there is a fundamental difference of opinion on that question ; but if you look to the transactions that have taken place in the North; if you look at the old Mahurangi block, bQUght 19 times over I believe, if you look to the district of Hawke's Bay and Wairarapa, where claims have had to be settled over and over again. You must allow that with all the care you have taken, and the experience yon have gained, you have not put yourselves out of the reach, of what might at any time have fanned itself into the same blaze as lighted up the Waitara. I say that you have not saved yourselves by your prac - tice from risk or danger. At the present time as a matter of mere policy can it fairly be said, that there is greater risk by going on with this prin ciple, than by going on with your practice of twenty yeais? I think not. For my own part, that 1 can only offer you my conviction that there is not the least danger under decently good management and proper safeguards ; that as to the ascertainment and registration of the Native title, you may put yourselves at perfect ease as to the safety and success of this measure, and that in the good faith and loyalty of the Natives themselves, you have the best guarantee you can desire. (Hear, hear.) Sir, this Bill, if accepted, will be taken as a declaration on the part of the House, of their opinion as to what should be done in future. But ie must not be supposed that the Government ask the House to pass the Bill with the view to bringing it into immediate operation. In the first place, it must be reserved for her Majesty's assent ; and in the next, and it is by no means certain that any legislation upon the Native lands, will not require the confirmation of an Act of the Imperial Parliament. I believe myself on that point, that tiie 73rd section of the Constitution Act does prevent our dealing with tfie Native lands, except upon the condition precedent of a cession of the Native title to the Queen, and that it will be necessary for giving full effect to the principle of Native ownership, that we should obtain the sanction of an Act of Parliament. But at any rate, in the relations of Ministers with the Governor, we cannot ask the House to bring such a measure into operation without reserving it for the Queen's assent. (Mr. Fitzgerald why?) I will tell my hon. friend why. Just think for a moment how it would bo, if the state of the case were the converse of what it it is no\y. If our course for the last 20 years, had been the recognition of Native ownership as a reality, and a Ministry should come into power on the question of reversing that system, and taking away from the Natives that which you had granted them (as we have supposed) 20 years back. Would my hon. friend say for one moment, that it would be just or right, that the Crown having given its consent to such an agreement with the Nativea. should not be consulted if we deprived them of the rights which her Majesty had been a party to conferring on them. So far as the Europeans are concerned, they being fully represented here, we do not care whether we give rights or take them away : but it would be manifestly impossible to do that in the case of the Natives who are not represented in this House, and so I say that in any reversal of a Native policy which has been systematically pursued for a long period of years' (if even then reversal be for the N atives benefit) the Roj'iil assent must be sought. Moreover, we are desirous to guard oui selves from even the appearance of touching- upon the relations we have proposed should subsist between His Excellency aud ourselves ; and we are therefore ready to leave out the provision that the powers proposed to be given should be exercised by the " Governor in Council," since this provision necessitates the assent and consent of the members of the Ministry. We should be perfectly willing to leave the Governor the responsibility of action stipulating only that we should give him oar advice when European interests arc concerned. And we further propose as an additional safeguard, that the Act should be brought into operation in such way and in such districts as the Governor himself may think safe and proper. Well, Sir. I have endeavoured to mak» the principal object and what 1 believe will be the results of the Bill perfectly clear to hon. members generally. If I have not succeeded, it is not from want of clear conviction in my own mind of what ought to be done. I appeal to the hon. member for Ellesmere (Mr. FitzGerald), to give me his support in this attempt to carry into eilect some portion of the views which he himself has advanced in this House. I appeal especially to my hon. friend the member for Rangitiki (Mr. Fox) to vote with me to-night Sir, no man knows better than 1 do tho influence which my hon. friend has been able to gain among the Native people. No man knows better than I do, ' that whatever their attitude towards us has been the result of prejudice and injustice — injustice, I believe myself most firmly to the character and intentions of Colonel Browne, than whom no more loyal or true-hearted Englishman ever breathed, (loud cheers). When my hon. friend the member for Rangitiki came into power, ho had the confidence of the Natives as the representative of a pacific policy; but they also understood distinctly that he himself was an advocate lor the complete, recognition of their title to their lands. Ido hope and my hon. friend knows perfectly well, that though we have not agreed on political subjects, and have never sat on the same side of this house, I did feel it my duty to give him every possible assistance, (hear, hear, from Mr. ITox), at a time when he had to encounter great difficulties among both Natives and Europeans. . I hope, I repeat, that it may not be said of my hon. friend that having when ho was in power made the natives believe that in him they had a great supporter of their rights to land, he retracted when he left office the opinion he then avowed. \ appeal to

him, because, I know that it is of the most essential consequence that the natives should not believe we make their rights the battledoors and shuttlecocks of party in this house ; but that O' the contrary we all desire to do them justice: si it would be a shame to find that the leadeia ' public opinion were imw divided upon that whi< ]•■ to the natives is of vital importance an Ju: . T which we were one and all agreed. I pray ■).• House at all events not to allow a great princ like this to be sacrificed by pecuniary consid. .. tions of Provincial interests. Let us, if we ii 1 - done the natives during the past twenty yea • practical injustice, be now ready to waive consiut tions of provincial profits in redressing it. Le? together give them the most practical proof can of our desire to be united with them, let i . try at length to convince them that whatew, may be our political and party differences on matters which affect European interests alone, we can at least unite to give them the motto which they received from King Potatau, the new device of " civil rights and equal laws " (loud cheera.) Mr. JOLLIE said he would take the present opportunity to invite the consideration of the House, to certain points bearing upon the legality, principle, and policy, of the very important measure now submitted for its approval. He thought it was very doubtful whether any such measure as this, requiring so much and such mature considera. tion, should have been brought forward by the Ministry at so late a period of the session, or indeed brougtitforward at all, until the Imperial Parliament by special legislation or" their own, should have removed the disabilities which he contended, the colonial legislature laid under in respect to any leigslation having in view, the object and the principle contemplated by the Bill. On this point he asked the House, to let him quote in the first place, the 7Srd clause of the Constitution Act, .which tuns as follows: — "It shall not be lawful fjr any person other than Tier Majesty, her heirs or successors, to purchase or in any wise acquire or accept from the aboriginal Natives, land of or belouging to, or used, or occupied by them in common as tribes or communities, or to accept any release or extinguishment of the rights of such aboriginal Natives in any such land as aforesaid ; and no conveyance or transfer of any such land* either in perpetuity or for any term or period, either absolutely or conditionally and either in property, or by way of lease or occupancy, and no such release or extinguishment, ag aforesaid, shall be of any validity or effect, unless the same be, made to, or entered into with, and accepted by her Majesty her heirs or. successors. Provided al.vays, that it shall be lawful for her Majesty, her heirs and successors, by instructions under the Signet and Royal Sign Manuel, or signified through one of her Majesty's principal Secretaries of State, to delegate her powers of accepting such conveyances or agreements, releases, or relinquishments, to the Governor of New Zealand, or the Superintendent of any province, within the limits of such Province aud to prescribe or regulate the terms on which such conveyances or agreements, releases, or extinguishments, shall be accepted." The effect of this clause of the Constitution Act, which no subsequent Act of Parliament had in the slightest degree altered, seemed to him to be one fatal to the present Bill, or any attempt on the part of the House to legislate for the same object ; "and the objection he took on that ground, derived additional weight from the terms in which the Secretary of State expressed himself, when forwarding the Constitution Act to the Governor : — " To their general concession [i. c. of the administration of the Waste Lands of the Crown] there are however, (said Sir John Pakington in his Despatch to Governor Grey, of 16th July, 1852,) certain exceptions rendered necessary by the peculiar circum* stances of New Zealand, both as respects the Native Title to land, and the right already granted by Parliament to the New Zealand Company. It has appeared so essential to maintain the principle that all acquisition of land from the Native tribes should take place through the local government only, that this regulation which previously rested on the Royal Instrnctions only, has now been incorporated in the Constitution Act, and in order to receive its maintenance, the Governor ia empowered to pay the purchase money to the Natives out of the first proceeds of all the Land Revenue." Such were the views of the Secretary of State in reference to this subject as affected by ths Constitution Act. If any one objected to him now tliat the prohibition in Clause 73 which had just been quoted attached only to purchases made from " tribes or communities •' and not from individual Natives, his reply to that would be to ask the Hotue to refer to the treaty of Wa!tingi itself, which was the basis of the understanding between the Crown and the Natives, and which would be seen clearly to comprise the case of individual as well as communal or tribal, ownership, consequently the case, about to be realised (if this Bill becomes law), of rule to and purchase bj r individuals. The second clause of the Treaty of Waitangi ran thus. — Her Majesty the Queen of England confirms and guarantees to the chiefs and tribes of New Zealand^and to the respective families and individuals thereof, the full exclusive and undisturbed possession of their lands and estates, forests,fisheries, and other properties which they may collectively or individually possess, so long as it is their wish and desire to retain the same in their possession. But the chiefs of the united tribes, and the individual chiefs, yield to Her Majesty the exclusive right of pre-emption over such lands as the proprietors thereof may be disposed to alienate, at such prices as may be agreed upon between the respective proprietors and persons appointed by Her Majesty to treat with them on thaj; behalf. This surely ought to be considered conclusive as to the meaniag and intention of the 73rd clause of the Constitution Act, of which, if their Bill could not be said to be a direct violation, the utmost that could be said in its favour, was that it was an adroit evasion if not of the letter, at least of the spirit of that act, The very thing indeed, that Lord Caernavon in his celebrated despatch of May 18, 1859 had obj^sted to the Native "Territorial Rights Bill" of 1858, a measure obviously much less extreme and exceptionable than the one now under discussion. But it had always been held by the legislature of the colony and by those most eomp3tent to judge of its legal powers, that colonial legislation on this subject, was unauthorised and illegal, whilst the 73rd clause • of the Constitution Act remained uurepealed. . The resolution of the hon. member for Rangitikei, upon which were founded, in the session of 1860, the " Native Council Act' 1 of that year, and the well known memorandum of the hon. gentleman, the member for Ellestnere, of the same year, in which he protested against the passing of the New Zealand Land Bill, or of any Act by the Imperial Parliament for the establishment of a Native Council without consulting the colonists themselves, both appeared to recognise the necessity of imperial legislation before the Colonial Legislature was competent or could with any good effect proceed to regulate the acquisition of native lands by direct purchase. But he would leave this part of the subject and pass into the consideration of another and no less important branch of it, the principle and policy which the Bill embodied and was intended to establish. Now with reference to this he desired to refrain as much as possible from any mere observations ,of his own, and to direct the attention of the House to such facts and public documents as might serve to indicate the past policy of the country in respect to land and land purchases, as well as the grounds upon which that policy had hitherto been pursued and depended. He would first of all read to the House, an extract from a despatch of Lord John Russell to Governor Hobson, dated January 22, 1841, showing the viewa then entertained by the English Colonial Minister as to the proper course for the local go» vernment to pursue in respect to assumed native rights to land : — " Whatever (said Lord John) nfoy be the custom or prevailing notion amongst them regarding the right of property in land, and the right of alienation, a law should be enacted declaring the absolute invalidity o? any coatcgr*

ance, or contract, or will, for the disposal of land i by one chief or chiefs, or by every individual native, when the object of that contract, or conveyance, or will, is to transfer to any person of European birth or descent the land" itself" — instructions which had been obeyed and carried into force since, more or less directly, by ordinances of the local legislature, and the principle spirit of which had been invariably held to, and acted upon in the government of the colony, except for a very short interval. When Governor Fitzroy in his erratic course took upon himself to waive the Crown's right of pre-emption and|issued his famous penny and ten shilling an acre proclamation, acts which had been always ruled to be amongst the strongest justifications for the recall of that Governor,- which so soon afterwards took place. Again, what on this subject of the doctrines and practice, as to native territorial rights, now again brought in question by the clause 2, of the present Bill, which, in hig opinion, most unwisely and unnecessarily asserted these rights to be absolute and indefeasible), what was the effect of the celebrated resolutions of the Committee of the House of Commons, appointed in 1844 for the purpose of considering the the whole state of New Zealand — a tribunal of all others perhaps the most impartial and the best qualified to speak with authority and effect on ■uch questions ? The third of the resolutions of that Committee were couched in these words : — •' That the acknowledgment by the local authorities of a right of property on the part of the Natives of New Zealand, in all wild land in these Islands, after the sovereignty had been assumed by Her Majesty, was not essential to the true construction of the Treaty of Waitangi, and was ah error which had been productive of very injurious consequences." The sixth was, — "That means ought to be forthwith adopted for establishing the exclusive title of the Crown to all land not actually occupied and enjoyed by Natives or held tinder Grants of the Crown; such land to be considered as vested in the Crown for the purpose of being employed in the manner most conducive to the welfare of the inhabitants, whether Natives or Europeans." Whilst the 12th of their resolu tions declared, — " That the prohibition to all private persons to purchase laud from the Natives ought to be strictly enforced, except that laud which may have been purchased by Natives, they should be at liberty to sell again, provided the transaction be sanctioned by the Protector." A distinct and direct prohibition of the very thing which the Bill now before the House was intended to effect, and which if effected would amount to nothing less than the complete reversal of what had been the avowed policy of the Government of this country from its very commencement. To. flhew this further, and more clearly still, he would read to the House a passage from the celebrated despatch of Earl Grey (of December, 1846) — a despatch which had given rise in former years to much discussion, and which conveyed to the then Governor of New Zealand (Sir George Grey), the instructions of the British Government in reference to the treatment of native rights to land : — " The imperfect information," said his Lordship, " which alone at this distance, I can hope to obtain as to the actual state of affairs in New Zealand, renders it impossible for me to venture to prescribe to you how far you are to go in attempting practically to act upon the principles I have laid down. I ihould infer from your own dispatches, as well as from those of your piedecessors, that the right of the Crown could not now be asserted to large tracts of waste land •which particular tribes ,have been taught to regard as their own. It appears that you have found it expedient to admit these pretensions to a considerable extent ; and having done bo, no apparent advantage could be suffered to weigh against the evil of acting in a manner either really or even apparently inconsistent with good faith. While, however, you scrupulously fulfil whatever engagements you have contracted, and maintain those rights on the part of the Native tribes to land, which you have already recognised, you will avoid as much as possible any further surrender of the property of the Crown. I trußt also that the enl which would otherwise arise from the concessions already made, may to a great degree be neutralized, by your strictly maintaining the exclusive right of the Crown to purchase land from the Native tribes to which it haß been assumed that it belongs.' This right resting as it does uot only upon what has been called tho Treaty of Waitangi, but « alsoupon theganeraland long recognied principles of national law,' ia one so important that it oughtalmost at all hazards tobe strictly enforced. To suffer it to be set aside would be to acquiesce in the rain of the Colony, since it would be fatal to the progressive and systematic settlement of the country. It is by the sale of land at more than a nominal price that its appropriation to individuals in allotments proportioned to their power of making use of it can alone be secured. It is the mode by which, with least inconvenience and difficulty, funds can be raised for emigration, and for executing those public works which are necessaiy for the profitable occupation of the soil ; in short, it is the very foundation upon whfab systematic colonisation must be based. But IT the Native tribes are permitted to sell large tracts of land to individuals for a mere' nominal consideration, it is obvioue, that so much land will be thrown upon the market as entirely to defeat the attempt to sell such lands as the Crown may still retain, at a price sufficient to answer the objects of the policy I have described. It has been 'asserted that ths Natives of New Zealand will never consent, unless compelled by force of arms, to the adoption of a systemby whichland bought from them at a nominal price, or at all events at alow one, by the servants of the Crown, is to be resold at a much higher rate to actual settlers. 1 fear it may be more difficult than it would have been formerly to reconcile them to this practice, nevertheless the attempt must be made ; and I still hope it may not be impossible to convinae them that the Crown receives the money so paid for land only as trustee of the community; that the price obtained for land only as trcstee for the pnblic. and that it is applied for their benefit &c forming part of the community; that the price obtained for land which is sold to settlers affords the means of constructing roads and bridges, of building churches and schools, and of introducing an additional European population ; thus really conducing far more to, their advantage than the paltry supply of goods which, if they sold the land for themselves, they would obtain for it." In confirmation of all which from Lord Grey, who really more than any British statemen had perhaps mastered the whole subject, of New Zealand, and was therefore well entitled to be cited on a question of this kind. It might be allowed to him to quote from the work of a gentleman who had been almost as great an authority on the same side of the question as his Lordship, whilst he was of course much better known in the Colony — he meant the " Six Colonies of New Zealand," by Mr. Fox. He -would take only one passage, though a good deal more might be found to the same effect in this and other writings cf the hon. member : — •• On the ground of expediency," says Mr Fox, " still less can he said in support of the Native right. Colonisation being once permitted, (and it cannot be prevented in «ome sort, either systematic or irregular,) the most beneficial thing that can be done for the Nativesis to promote the immigration of civilized people into their country, The admission of their obsolute right to the" land raises innumerable obstacles to beneficial colonisation. It involves the colonizing government in endless disputes with land--8 larks ab6ut lands which they attect to have tvi lehased from the Natives. It causes a body of wretched speculators to throng to the colony for the express purpose of raising and establishing ftich claims; men who have neither the capital nor the energy to use an acre of the vast districts they acquire, but who hopeto make a fortune by its I-e-sale, as' it gains value by the exertions of others, *nd the increase of population. It creates in the breast of the natives an insatiable cupidity, which ndemne them to listless inactivity and a con-

tinuanoe in barbarous habits, so long aa they have an acre of land remaining by which they hope to live in indolence. The money they receive for it does them no good, but is wasted, or at least spent almost as soon as received, and often in ways very injurious to them. But though, on grounds both of justice, law and expediency.it might at the commencement of New eZaland colonisation, have been desirable to negative the claim put forth on behalf of the natives, it is now too late to think oi it. They have been taught a contrary • doctrine ' by men of sacred character, high in office ; and though, I believe, without such teaching they might have been easily persuaded to surrender the waste land to the Crown, yet now it is now too late. The only method by which it can now be got possession of, by a gradual and sometimes very tedious negotiation and purchase." And yet even that poor resource of the Government, — the right of pre emption over native lands, in which consisted the only possible public adrantage that could still accrue from the Treaty of Waitanga, after the absurb interpretation which had been in practice imposed upon the terms of that Treaty, was now to be given up in favour of a theory and system which conferred an absolute title on the native claimants, and actually abrogated the exclusive right of the Crown to purchase from, and consequently take away, practically speaking, on its part to purchase at all or to control and regulate the colonisation of the country — for he took it for granted that if direct purchases were allowed from the Natives, the Crown would no longer be able to be the purchaser of large blocks of land. This waa a proceeding to which he for one could not assent, neither in point of principle, nor yet as it respected the interests of the Natives themselves. Those interests he thought must suffer materially in the long run by surrendering to them an absolute right of disposal of their lands, if there were any truth in the testimony of those who might be considered to be the beat authorities on the subject. As the New Zealand Company remarked in the Petition which they presented in 1845 to the House of Commons, so he believed now — " We have higher obligations to the uncivilised tribes of whose territories we have acquired possession than any founded on mere compact, and we cannot be justified by any treaty in pursuing a policy opposed to their real interests. It is especially their interest that the Crown ihould administer the unoccupied lands of New Zealand, and maintain the wise law which prohibits all private purchasers of land from the native tribes ; it is their interest that they should be rescued from the machinations of the land shark, and denied the means of purchasing their own destruction ; it is their interest too, that they should be disabused of fantastic expectations of immediate gain, and checked in attempts at extortion ; that their obedience to law should be temperately but firmly enforced, and that they should be kept out of collision with that more civilised population, on whose good will their future welfare must depend." Another objection which he felt to the Bill now before the Hsuse, related to the time when it was sought to introduce so serious an innovation on the established policy of the Government. He did not mean bo much the period of the session to which lie had already alluded, and which was no doubt tae late for the proper discussion of so important a measure, what he meant was, in the first place, thas the Bils wasaltogethermiß-timed, wnsin fact, not|authorized by the particular condition and circumstance of the colony &t the present moment. If not in a state of actual war with the Nativeg. we occupied towards them, or great numbers of them, and they towards us, something very much like a hostile attitude. The great want and difficulty experienced at present in relation to them was, not one in respect of land, so much as one of the establishment of the authority of the law over an uncivilised people, to whom concessions had been carried on our part very far already, and who would he apprehended, be inclined to look upon thia Bill in itself, undoubtedly the last and greatest concession of all, as being dictated by fear, and the divided councils which fear often engenders. The Maori at present knew that practically the land was his, and it was notorious that generally speaking, he was not disposed to part with it, so much so, thatwe could not expect by this Bill or any other, to obtain any very great immediate re suits in the way of acquiring territory. But in the second place, hethougnt the measure ill -timed and objectionable in point of principle, became only the other day, by a series of resolutions, the Minsstry disclaimed to the Imperial Government, all direct responsibility in relation to Native affairs. The House would now by eanctioning this Bill, be stultifying its own decision, and assuming a responsibility the vejy gravest it could possibiy ! assume — a responsibility which in his opinion, it was not at all bound to accept, and which it would, he believed, hereafter, vainly endeavour to transfer from itself to his Excellency the Governor. He could not conceive that a measure of this kind could be brought into extensive operation without creating constant risks, com plications, and difficulties, between them and tha Europeans. J Now what, he wished to know, was the available means on the part of Government, of meeting these risks, and encountering those most formtdable difficulties ? If the Duke of Newcastle's Despatch of May 28, were to be accepted as meaning anything — it would be only for a short time that he could rely upon the assistance of the British Government or the presence of any considerable body of British troops, remembering the terms in which Lord Caernarvon had expressed the views of the British Government in his celebrated despatch of May 1859, in favour of retaining the control of that government over all matters of Native policy especially the land question, and comparing the terms of that despatch with those of the Despatch from the Duke of Newcastle of May last, in which his Grace announced to the colony, that it must henceforward or very shortly assume an entire responsibility on Native affairs, j as on others, and also undertake theenernal defence of the culony, he must con!e3s he felt no little surprise and indignation, for there appeared to him in that announcement a base surrender both of the cherished principles of the British Government and the obligations it had voluntarily undertaken on behalf of the Natives as the guardian of their interests, not to speak of the British settlers ; but the facts were to be acknowledged no less than to be deplored, that this despatch of the Duke of Newcastle had entirely altered the features of things and imposed upon the House the necessity of very seriously considering the i question of responsibility or non-responsibility in relation to the administration of Native affairs, only a day or two back the House had deliberately declined to accept tho responsibility sought to be thrust upon them, and yet it was now asked to implicate itself, in a large and undefined respon. sibiHty upon the most dangerous of questions, the Native land question. Now, it was said to be the Governors Bill, and that his Excellency undertook the responsibility of it, if it really were so he might perhapo consent to waive many of his objections to the measure, especially if it could be altered, to enable the Governor to carry out its provisions discretionally by the proclamation of districts. <fee, on his own responsibility as representative of tha Imperial Governmant. He certainly thought it was highly necessary to give his Excellency at the present conjuncture the utmost assistance and the greatest possible powers of coping with the difficulties of the country in relation to native affairs ; he would willingly even concur with the hon. member for Nelson (Mr. Stafford) in his acting as Dictator, if it would carry the colony promptly and successfully through its present trials. He was disposed also to do his utmost to support his Excellency's present Government and their several measures, and particularly very largely to defer to the judgment and experience of his hon. friend the Native Minister, who had declared this measure in his opinion to be essential to the satisfaction of the Natives, and to the peace of the country. Moreover, he was very desirous as a Northern member, not unneceisarily to" interfere with the decision of the House, in what after all

was very much a Northern question; or to go against the views of men who, aa living amongst the Natives and baying their whole fortunes involved, were, necessarily better judges than others of what was best calculated to satisfy them, and secure the peaceful progress of the colony. On thuse \* rounds, in was not his intention actually to divide tho House againat the second reading of the Bill, much as he was opposed to some of its provisions. But he begged to warn honorable gentlemen of the North, if they would have this measure, that tiiey must take all tho risks and liabilities fchrt belonged to it, for on behalf of his constituents, and he believed he might add the South generally, he should feel that they had a right to be exonerated from the responsibility that would attach to every vote of that House whhch sanctioned it, and this introduced another element of discord, and probably a fresh cause for separation into to the relations between the two Islands.