E—No. 3e

■ FURTHER PAPERS RELATIVE 2. Because, in past years, I was in frequent commnnication with Mr. Commissioner McLean on this subject, both with reference to the country in general, and to the Taranaki district in particular. Mr. McLean has recorded the result of those communication* in a paper, published in Pari. Pap., July, 1860, (p. p., 303, 304.) " I do not think it practicable to give Crown Grants to Natives by defining the boundaries of "individual rights to land: it would be productive of quarrels and disputes, as there is really no " such thing as individual title, that is not entangled with the general interests of the Tribe, and often " with the claims of other Tribes, who may have migrated from the locality." " I have tried this system at the suggestion of the Bishop, at Taranaki. It gave me consider- " able insight into the state of Native tenure, but in endeavouring to carry it out, I found it took " about 30 days to define the boundaries of the claims of 40 individuals over an extent of 40 acres ; " and even then they regarded the arrangement as altogether imaginary, and it did not appear to " affect, in the estimation of the Natives, the general or Tribal right." " It is absolutely necessary that the Tribal claim to such land should first be perfectly obliterated " by previous sale to the Government." You will, therefore, I think, be ready to admit that I have strong prima facie reason for believing that the Tribal right does exist at Taranaki; that it has been understood to exist; and that itjias been recognized by former Governments in the acts of their Chief Land Puichase Commissioner. The general impression that Mr. McLean was of one mind with myself on the subject of the existence ol a Tribal right among the Ngatiawa at Taranaki, may be gathered from the enclosed extract from a Memorial addressed to the Governor by a Taranaki settler, (personally unknown to me), on the 22nd February, 1860. 3. Because an argument comparatively recent, has been brought forward, to the effect that the Tribal right at Taranaki was set aside by Governor Fitzroy, and that his declaration that he would recognize in all their integrity the rights of the Ngatiawa, applied only to their rights as individual proprietors. As I was present with Governor Fitzroy at Taranaki on the occasion referred to, I seem to have a right to request that the above assertion may be thoroughly investigated. My own belief being that no such distinction was ever intended ; but that the speeches of Governor Fitzroy, and the articles quoted Irom the " Maori Messenger," related to the rights of the Ngatiawa, whether slaves, fugitives, or absentees of any other class, as distinguished from the 76 men and women, who assumed the right of selling all the district, known as the Company's Block, to John Dorset, as the Agent of the INew Zealand Company. In conclusion, I have only to remark upon the following expression in your letter of the 11th of Sept., 1860.—"In requesting that a judicial enquiry may take place, whatever that may mean." In the 2nd clause of the terms offered by the Governor to Hapurona and the Ngatiawa, I find " that the decision of the Governor or of such persons as he shall appoint to investigate the title is " to be conclusive." These words are too ambiguous to give satisfaction to the minds of the Natives, who are watching the issue of this question with anxious suspense in all parts of the country. It would have been far more satisfactory if the question of title had been referred to a lawful tribunal. Without attempting to define the words "judicial enquiry," which to an English mind seem to require no explanation, I may recite the general principle laid down as early as 1840, in the recommendation of a Committee of the House of Commons. " That it is expedient that Commissioners not being persons connected with or having any "pecuniary interset in New Zealand should be appointed by the Crown to enquire into and deter- " mine all claims to lands in New Zealand, according to certain definite principles to be laid down in " their instructions." And in a letter written to me from Taranaki by the Rev. Mr. Whiteley, in 1858,1 find a similar recommendation : " Let a commission be appointed by the Government, to consist of six Native Chiefs, and six " European gentlemen, acquainted with the Native language, all of both parties, unconnected with " this place (Taranaki). " Let this commission meet here and receive evidence from all sources and from both sides, as to " the nature, ground, and extent of their respective claims." It is unnecessary to point out the difference between the mode of enquiry here recommended and that which was conducted by Mr. Parris on the Waitara question. Whatever opinions may have been held on the subject of the past, I sincerely hope that the measures now adopted will be such as to unite all persons in support of the Government. In order to shew that I hold no opinions at variance with this hope, I enclose a Paper, which I have printed for private circulation. Ihave, &c, The Hon. the Colonial Secretary, G. A. New Zealand, &c, &c, &c. Auckland,

EXCLOSUKE No. 1 J2nd February, 1860.

Enclosure No. 2 2nd February, 1861.