E—No. 1.

was with me, and the influence of Potatau and his power were too notorious to admit of doubt or discussion. It was therefore evident that any attempt to introduce institutions of Civil Government among the Natives of the Waikato District without first gaining the assent and co-operation of Potatau, would be likely to make him view them with suspicion, and as certainly lead to failure. 7. Very soon after Mr. Fenton's appointment, Mr. McLean called my attention to the fact that Potatau and the old Chiefs had not been conciliated, and that any attempt to act in opposition to their wishes would be fruitless and probably dangerous. I spoke to Mr. Fenton at various times on the subject, but while he always professed a desire to attend to my wishes, he continued to act as before. Mr. McLean, the Native Secretary, also complained that all Mr. Fenton's correspondence was addressed to one of the Responsible Ministers; and I find, on reference to my memorandum book, that I endeavoured to reconcile this difference by directing that Letters on Native subjects should be written in duplicate, one copy being sent to the Native Office. It will be seen, however, by Mr. Richmond's answer (Evidence, Q. 996) that this change of arrangement " dried up Mr. Fenton's correspondence." I have also found the following Memorandum dated 4th February, 1858, which was intended to be sent to my Responsible Advisers, but which, after shewing it to Mr. Fenton, I withdrew. " The leading article of the Southern Cross of this morning uses language identically the 1 same with that used by Mr. Fentou. I entirely acquit that gentleman of having written it, but "it would be difficult to convince me that he did not inspire the editor or that the editor does " not inspire him. In either case the matter deserves notice: that there is misrepresentation of " facts Mr. Fenton ought to know. The attack upon the office of which he is a subordinate is " unjust, and if actually written by him would deserve dismissal. I think Mr. Fenton should be " offered the choice between Government service and that of the Press." Mr. Fenton assured me that he would cease from communicating with the Press; but as attacks upon the Native Department were continued in the same strain, that harmony between the different members comprising it which is essential to success, became hopeless. 8. It was not however until some time after this that Potatau and his half-brother, Tamati Ngapora called on me; (and here I must observe that I never invited any expression of opinion by Potatau, as stated by Mr. Richmond in his answer, Evidence, Q. 971); the former was silent as usual when not pleased, but Ngapora informed me that Mr. Fenton had neglected Potatau and allied himself with the younger men of the country, who desired to emancipate themselves from his control, and that we should find the young men a rope of sand which would separate instantly if Potatau did but move his finger. 9. Soon after this, Potatau left Mangare against my wish; and went to reside permanently in the Waikato, where he remained till his death. The district then became more divided into parties. One party headed by Potatau was called the " King's party," and the other, patronised by Mr. Fenton, was called the "Queen's party:" a separation which was unwise and impolitic, as Potatau might have been won by a little attention, and his influence was so great that no dependence could be placed on the stability of any party opposed to him. 10. Mr. McLean, the Native Secretary, considered the state of affairs highly dangerous, and thought it his duty to recommend that Mr. Fenton should confine himself strictly to his magisterial duties, and subsequently advised that he should be withdrawn; adding that he could not answer for the peace of the district if Mr. Fenton remained. While, however, I was considering whether I could not employ Mr. Fenton, and avail myself of his talents and enthusiasm in some other district, the Attorney-General requested that I would allow him to be appointed Assistant Law Officer, to which I assented. 11. From the foregoing statements, it will be seen that I fully recognized Mr. Fenton's talents and his zeal; that I had expressed my approval of his plan in strong terms; that Mr. McLean has done the same (vide his statement, Evidence p. 86): but, while approving his plans, I was satisfied that Mr. Fenton had failed to conciliate those on whom its success depended. He neglected the old chiefs, whose power was and still is indisputable; and he quarrelled with those in his own department whose long experience might have guided him to success if he would have sought and followed their advice. 12. And here I must call attention to a statement signed by Mr. McLean, the Native Secretary, and Mr. Smith, his Assistant, at pages 84-87 of the Evidence. Similar views were expressed to me in conversations during the time Mr. Fenton was employed on the Waikato. I entirely agree in those opinions; but if I had not agreed with them, having been little more than two years in the country, I should have hesitated long before I could have adopted the views of a young man —comparatively a novice—in opposition to the opinion of a gentleman at the head of the Native Department, who has been 17 years in that office, who enjoyed the entire confidence of my able predecessor, and who is admitted to have more influence with the Maori race, aud more knowledge of their feelings and opinions, than any one man in New Zealand. 13. I now turn to the Report of the Committee, which was formed of the members of the House of Representatives, of which a large part has always viewed the withdrawal of the Native Department from the control of Ministers with great jealousy. Some of the members of this Committee had just voted that the conduct of Native affairs should be transferred to Ministers; and about this time the whole subject was much agitated. I must also add that the Native Secretary, Mr. McLean, is one of those who are stigmatized as " old officials," having held office under my predecessor, Sir George Grey, and possessed his entire confidence. 14. The Committee, after expressing their approval of my despatch of 9th May, 1857, proceed to say that they cannot " concur in the views expressed by the Governor in his Despatch

7

TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE.