E.—No. 4

No. 13. RESIDENT MAGISTRATE, EAST CAPE, TO THE HONORABLE THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL. Resident Magistrate's Office, Eaugitukia, 9th June, 1862. Sir,— I have the honor to address you on a subject which causes me a considerable degree of perplexity, and which, it appears to me, should be set right as soon as possible. I refer to the numerous adultery cases which are bi'ought before me. It may not be out of place to state that as yet these have been settled by a sort of out-of-court adjudication. So soon as a case of adultery occurs or is suspected (the loose habits of the Maoris affording ample opportunity for both), the culprits, witnesses, and friends of the parties are led instantly to the nearest Office-bearer, who, after listening to the statements, usually requires them to appear before the Magistrate forthwith, no matter what the hour may be. Indeed, when travelling, I have been more than once roused from sleep to hear cases of the kind. On such occasions the Maoris will not wait the tardy process of the law—habit and inclination alike prompt them to demand and expect satisfaction. To put them off for time sufficient to take an information for the necessary process of a Summons, <fec, would be to drive them to the Runanga Lynch-law, which it is my chief aim to avoid, as being productive of contempt for the law, or to seek redress by means of a taua, a still more objectionable mode of procedure. According to English law, adultery is " a civil inj ury and a grievous wrong ; the law gives satisfaction to the husband by an action against the adulterer." The principle of the old Maori Ture was pretty much the same.; the friends of the husband made a taua upon the adulterer's party, and thus obtained satisfaction. Again, in the rules prepared for the Natives by Sir W. Martin, late Chief-Justice, we find page 4 (I quote from the Maori), " The fine was formerly given to the husband of the woman. In later times it was seen that this was a bad plan, for it is not right that the error of the woman should become a source of wealth to her husband. Wherefore that rule was set aside and a different one is in use now." There is then a manifest discrepancy between two books published and circulated under the authority of the Government, upon a point which is more frequently brought up in Native Districts than any other. One makes adultery a civil matter, the amount of compensation varying with the circumstances ; the other places it on the list of Criminal offences, and fixes the fine at not exceeding Twenty pounds for unmarried women (not distinguishing between single girls and women married according to Maori custom), and not exceeding Thirty pounds for married women. At the Kohimarama Conference (I speak from memory, not having a copy of the printed report with me), this amendment was freely discussed, and generally objected to by the Chiefs present, who maintained that the injured husband required an utu to lighten his heart. They could not see why an offence " between man and man should not be atoned for by money." Then the rules say the fine shall be paid to the Queen and to the Runanga. This acknowledgement of the Runanga's claim to a portion of the fine has been productive of much evil. If the Runanga were a corporate body, an institution of local or self-government, it might be wise to make this provision, but it is not so. The Runanga, in the common acceptation of the term, is a community, consisting of any number of persons exceeding one family. Thus, within a few hundred yards of my present residence, there is a collection of some three or four huts, the inhabitants of which style themselves " Te Runanga o Pahairomiromi ;" the latter being the name of the village. These, and many other similar Runangas, assume all the powers and privileges of the largest Runanga (as at present constituted), and claim to be independent, in such cases as the one under consideration, of any control by the general Runauga, if such a term may be applied to the voice of the mass of the people. Another point too requires consideration. The Maori women are so notoriously inconstant that they are looked upon as the chief offenders in the majority of cases, and my experience, which has been pretty extensive, proves that in holding this opinion the Maoris are not far from the truth. It is proposed to put a check upon this by punishing the women as well as the men, as the former sinning with impunity, and having few scruples in a moral point of view, act the part of the tempter, reversing the ordinary received English view of such matters, and seduce instead of being seduced. Upon my arrival in this district, I found the practice to prevail of punishing the women, by causing them to weave floor mats for the Churches, whare Minita, whare Runanga, &c. In this the Maori Kaiwhakawa acted on the principle that— " Satan finds some mischief still, . For idle hands to do." and I have been obliged, in some instances, to make use of what was in reality the law of the place, settling these matters a-la-Maori, and out of Court. Acting on the rule laid down by Sir William Martin, the adulterer has been fined by the Runanga, generally in a very capricious manner ; sometimes horses, to the number of two, three, and four ; sometimes six cows, and occasionally sheep, pigs, or, in fact, anything. It often happens that a man who has been fined by the Runanga three or four horses, gets off by paying a couple of

50

PAPERS RELATING TO