EVIDENCE TAKEN IN SELECT COMMITTEE ON

15. Then fear of civil penalties would be more likely to deter them than the principle of engaging with troops ?—To fight with troops would gratify their pride. The tribe who have stolen the powder have already stated%s much that they would be delighted to have troops sent down to demand the powder, but they do not wish retaliation in commercial relations. Such retaliation would be severely felt. 16. Are there any other cases in which Natives have co-operated ?—Yes ; a section of the tribe which stole the powder was settled at Waiheki. They cultivated their land there, and had canoes and other property. The tribe who owned Waiheki and was resident there, the moment they heard they had committed this theft, seized all that tribe's property and declined giving it up to these Natives until every cask of the stolen powder was returned to its owner. 17. Do you think that putting this restriction on the district to which the tribe belonged who stole the powder would lead to the restitution of it ?—I do ; there is no doubt of it ; but I state that the restriction should be confined to that tribe and the very limited space they occupy. 18. Do you think any penalty should be placed on Europeans trading with Natives when discovered ?—I consider the Bill useless without it. 19. Do you think any mischief likely to arise from the intercourse between Europeans and the disaffected native tribes ? —I do. It leads the friendly tribes to consider there is no distinction between friendly and unfriendly tribes. That not sufficient notice is taken of acts of aggression; unless some notice is taken, they attribute it to weakness on the part of the English to punish offenders. 20. In such a District as Mania (Coromandel) would it be possible, do you think, to enforce this according to British Law?—l do not suppose it could; I think it very questionable. 21. Would it be possible to execute a Magistrate's Warrant, and bring the offender before the Court ?—Not without the co-operation of the Chiefs of the District. 22. Has any attempt been made in the case of the Kawau powder robbery to execute the ordinary process of the law?—No attempt that lam aware of. It would prove ineffectual. Without some extending measure of this nature, such an offence would remain actually unpunished. 23. Would that be likely to lead the Natives to a sense of its impropriety?— Yes ; other Natives would not be deterred from committing offences, and the offenders themselves would be emboldened. I think that spirit would be likely to be contagious to a very great extent. Repeated acts of that kind must result in hostility, that is of the attempted employment of Military Force against them. 24. That of course might involve bloodshed?— Yes; and an enormous expense not to be calculated upon. 2."). If that Act was enforced would it be fair towards settlers in those districts where they lived, would they be in any danger?—lt is impossible for me to say particularly, in some cases they might not be in danger. The Natives might consider it a matter to be settled between the troops and themselves. 26. Suppose that the outsettlers should take any part in the quarrel?— Then they might eventually become involved in it. During Heke's war the settlers were not molested by him though they carried on a vigorous war against the troops. 27. I low if the settlers should take any part in the quarrel?— Then they must inevitably beiome involved in it. 28. Would they apply the law of retaliation in case of an actual war?— Tribes of high caste and standing with an intelligent Chief over them might not molest settlers in case of a war, but a war always brought in so many contributors of different tribes that there might be of the adherents of the fighting party some who would take revenge on the unprotected settlers. 2'J. What is your opinion of the proposed measure?—l look upon such a measure as is now proposed entirely as a prevention of such a resort to extremities. I believe that it is a Law which would not require to be enforced very often, one or two examples under it would be sufficient to prove to the Natives generally that the Europeans had the power of punishing offences and it would be quite in accordance with their own ideas. 30. Can you suggest any rule to apply to the case in which such a law should be enforced?—lt should only be enforced in extreme cases such as that of the Kawau robbery of powder, or when any serious injury has been done to the life or property of Europeans. I would not apply it to cases of disturbances between tribes themselves, the less interference with their districts the better. 31. Is not the effect of the present war at Taranaki between the Natives to drive the friendly Natives within the European boundary immediately adjoining the scene of hostilities?— Yes ; it is so. 32. Would not the accomplishment of the Bill be likely to compromise the Europeans ?—Yes; 1 think so, the defeat of the friendly Natives who would be drawn within the European boundaries would * be certain to implicate and endanger the Europeans. 33. Would not the provisions of this Bill, if applied to the scene of hostilities, with the assent and co-operation of the friendly Natives, till the other parly of Natives was willing to come to a pacific solution of their differences, lead to a present and probably future cessation of hostilities ?—lt would not have that immediate effect. 34. If the friendly Natives came within the boundary land, could the provisions of this Bill be introduced in any form so as to lead to a termination of hostilities ? —I think that a restriction on the supplies with which the Natives arc supplied, as arms, ammunition, and spirits, would have a beneficial tendency. 35. Are they not prohibited by law now ? —No ; the Natives of the Chatham Islands, related to those residing at Waitara, who have lately received supplies of every kind from the Australian

4