1

THE NEW-ZEALAND DEBATE.

In our last, when speaking of British Colonial Policy, we purposed giving the speech of sir Howard Douglas, as (with many others) it was forwarded to us, for the intended pamphlet of 'The Knowledge Society.'

We hope it will be considered nothing invidious in making this selection, repeating, as our reason, that the worthy baronet's remarks involve great principles; but, in this instance, we think, no less than the public generally, along with the press, the organ-the-leader-and-theled-of public opinion, that there was much of undue severity in what he uttered.

On the other hand, we admire sir Howard's high tory principles :-the day has gone-by when the crown is oppressive of its subjects-but the day is, and we say it with extreme sorrow, that the power of the crown is far from what it ought to be; that, piecemeal, its prerogative is curtailed, clipt, until, at length, it is almost powerless, for, even, good; that whilst royal minds and noblemen are diligent in the service of the finearts (and we, of all parties, who have been setting an example-when little were they in this country heeded or thought-of-for their encouragement, in our long-continued series of authentic, ancient Portraits, long-after followed, under royal patronage, by memoirs— never before published-of Queens of England!)-other and undermining arts are but too apparent to give to royalty as little of control as possible, over public affairs. Are, we would ask, such things, together with railroad bills, the only things needed by the public? Are there not, from time to time, developed, abuses, the most galling, frauds the most excessive, yet made-known, only, by some bursting of indignation, or public outbreak, as in Wales, or a declaration of some frightful deficiency. But if the crown have lost its more arbitrary powers, of which both the public and the crown may mutually rejoice; if the official servants of the crown have gained adherents from among the families and connections M. C. 1.-2-45.

of the endless number of commissioners and revising barristers, to whom they have given, or for whom they have procured appointments, whilst the crown, itself, has really become weaker and weaker, against which ills would that sir Howard Douglas could stand in the gap, yet would we see an unflinching and stern control over all public officers and bodiescorporate, those hydra-heads, some even spreading their exclusive powers in almost every direction, growing, in strength, almost stronger than the crown :—more, then, than all boards, there is wanted

A Board of General Control, over these various under-heads of public, and directors of semi-public affairs.

Thus would we constitute this Board. We would appoint three judges for the public service. We use this term in its largest, yet its most simple and natural sense. Their office would be to administer to the wants of the public. To hear, as if the king, as of old, was in the court of his palace-his palace-court -all persons who conceived themselves to be wronged by any public body, through neglect, delay, or unjust oppressions, for it should ever be borne-inmind, by those who preside over public affairs, that, generally speaking, the time of all the opposite party is paid-fortime every unnecessary delay is, therefore, a positive, and, in many instances, a very cruel pecuniary or personal wrong. To redress galling annoyances of this description, we humbly believe that a board so constituted, would confer on the community at large-that is, of every degree-the greatest of all possible benefits.

Should this branch be carried-out, beneficially, we would enlarge their sphere of action; we would give them a reference control over all bodies constituted by act of parliament, or by charter. In a word, we would enable them to carryout, with a high and beneficent hand, the less-aspiring, but yet not more honorable principles of The Knowledge Society', whereby peace might ensue to those who would seek it, from such an easy, speedy, and powerful redress against wrongs.

The Speech of sir Howard Douglas in the House of Commons, on Wednesday the 18th of June, 1845.-" I have read these bulky volumes with deep interest, and profound attention; and approach this discussion with some knowledge of the facts of the case, and not without entertaining great dread of what may ensue. With some experience of Colonial affairs, I know, as a professional man, the serious difficulties, and sad consequences of desultory warfare, in a remote quarter of the world, with numerous tribes of Aborigines, in an extensive country, with a very insufficient force; and I speak with peculiar interest, on this subject, inasmuch as that small force consists of a detachment, belonging to the regiment which I have the honor to command. No Member of this House-no subject of this realm-attaches more importance to the extension of the Empire, by a sound and well-conducted system of colonisation, than I do; and it rejoices me greatly to find by these discussions, that hon. Members, opposite, even the noble Lord, the Member for Sunderland, who repudiates the vital principle of the Colonial system, have not yet, altogether, abandoned the subject of colonisation, and still appear to cling to a policy, which I began to fear, was getting out of date, and considered to be old-fashioned. ["Hear, Hear."] I mark that derisive cheer—be it so-my opinions are as old as the days in which the foundations of this great Empire were laid, in those well-known Colonial establishments, by which these little islands have become the centre of a mighty Empire; and those opinions are as firm as that Empire is, I trust, enduring. It is because I do attach that importance to colonisation conducted upon sound and approved principles, and in a judicious manner; it is because I do most fully admit the vast capacities and capabilities of the New Zealand Islands, as rich and extensive fields for British colonisation, that I condemn and deplore that precipitate, unauthorized, lawless scheme, which has blighted those prospects, and which has been the main cause of all the difficulties and disasters that have occurred, and may yet happen, from collisions with the natives. In support of my assertion, that the recent attempts at colonisation have not been consistent with experience that they were illegal, unauthorized, and have been the main cause of the difficulties which have ensued-I quote the Report of the Select Committee of the last Session, drawn up by the noble Lord, the Member for Sunderland. That Report states :—

"That in the measures which have been taken for establishing a British Colony in these Islands, those rules as to the mode in which colonisation ought to be conducted, which have been drawn from reason and from experience, have not been sufficiently attended

to.

"That neither individuals, nor bodies of men, belonging to any nation, can form Colonies, except with the consent and under the direction and control of their own Government; and that from any settlement which they may form, without the consent of their Government, they may be ousted. This is simply to say, as far as Englishmen are concerned, that Colonies cannot be formed without the consent of the Crown.

"That this attempt led at once to a violation of the law, by the first settlers entering into a voluntary agreement for the establishment of an authority, by which they hoped, in the absence of any legitimate power, to maintain order amongst themselves. The illegality of this arrangement was pointed out to the Company by the then Secretary of State.

measures

"That it is to be regretted that more decisive were not adopted for preventing the sailing of the expedition under these circumstances; since it appears important, with reference to the future, to observe; that such unauthorized attempts at colonisation cannot be permitted without leading to the most serious inconvenience.

"That the irregular and precipitate mode of sending out the first settlers, had the unfortunate effect of placing those settlers and the agents of the New Zealand Company, from the very outset, on unfriendly terms with the officer, whom Her Majesty's Government found it necessary immediately to dispatch from England, for the purpose of establishing the authority of the Crown in the Islands of New Zealand, has been one of the main causes of the difficulties with which it has had to contend.

And the first Resolution of the Committee, which appears to have been unanimous, embodies these opinions, in the following

terms:

"That the conduct of the New Zealand Company in sending out settlers to New Zealand, not only without the sanction, but in direct defiance of the authority of the Crown, was highly irregular and improper."

With this I entirely concur. That attempt to colonize a state acknowledged to be free and independent, was, as I have asserted, illegal, unjustifiable, and unauthorized: it was, moreover, conducted with fatal precipitation. The first Colony was despatched, before any arrangement could have been made by the agents, previously sent out to prepare for its reception, and before British authority was established in New Zealand. That expedition ought to have been stopped. An embargo ought to have been laid on their proceedings, until British authority, and British law bad been established in New Zealand; and Lord Normanby, instead of indulging in strong writing against the unauthorized undertaking-extracts of which have been read by several hon. Members-my noble friend, the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, in his very able speech and others—should

have resorted to strong measures. He (Lord Normanby) should have stopped the expedition by proclamation, but this not being so, it does appear to me that the British Consular, or Residential, or Diplomatic Agent, who had been sent out there to treat with the native tribes, should have prevented that expedition from entering on their undertaking, until British authority and law should have been established in New-Zealand: and, for myself, I would add, that, if acting in that capacity, I would have sent that Colony to the neighbouring British Colony of New South Wales, there to wait. [Lord John Russell: Which would have been against the law.] It would not have been illegal; it would have prevented an illegal transaction. The time would come when all would have to deplore that the Government of the day did not interfere in some way to prevent that expedition from proceeding to, or entering on their lawless undertaking. Persisting, however, in this audacious and lawless enterprise, in defiance of the authority of the Crown, the New-Zealand Company forced the Government to resort to the only effectual way by which that act could be covered--that of acquiring the Sovereignty of the New-Zealand Islands-and now insist upon what would amount to a violation of the Treaty with the chiefs and natives of NewZealand, which the Queen of England was advised by the noble Lord, the member for London, to ratify. Much has been said to ridicule what is called the farce of making treaties, or compacts, with natives in an uncivilized state, for the sovereignty and soil of the countries in their occupancy. How stands our title to the Eastern Settlement of the Cape of Good Hope? By compacts with the Caffres. How stands it with respect to Sierra Leone? By compacts with the natives likewise? How have our titles to the soil in that vast region which has been settled in Canada since its conquest, been acquired, but by purchase from the natives, whose right to the soil we never disputed? Lord Normanby, in his dispatch of the 14th August, 1839, to Captain Hobson, states, that we acknowledge New-Zealand as a sovereign and independent State, so far as it was possible to make that acknowledgment in favor of the people, composed of numerous, dispersed, and petty tribes. Adverting to the colony which had recently sailed from this country, and the necessity of establishing amongst them some settled form of Civil Government, his Lordship says:—

"The spirit of adventure having thus been effectually roused, it can no longer be doubted that an extensive settlement of British subjects will be rapidly established in New Zealand; and that, unless protected and restrained by necessary laws and institutions, they will repeat, unchecked, in that quarter of the globe, the same process of war and spoliation, under

which uncivilized tribes, have almost invariably disappeared, as often as they have been brought into the immediate vicinity of emigrants from the nations of Christendom. To mitigate, and, if possible, to avert these disasters, and to rescue the emigrants themselves from the evils of a lawless state of society, it has been resolved to adopt the most effective measures for establishing amongst them a settled form of Civil Government. To accomplish this design, is the principal object of your mission." This means the acquisition of the Sovereignty by treaty with the chiefs of the tribes. Lord John Russell, in his dispatch of the 9th of December, 1840, to Captain Hobson, adverting to the formal recognition of New-Zealand as an Independent State in 1835, to the condition of the people (viz., the New-Zealanders), and to their competency to cede the Sovereignty on behalf of the people at large to Great Britain, writes thus: :

"Amongst the many barbarous tribes with which our extended Colonial Empire brings us into contact in different parts of the globe, there are none whose claims on the protection of the British Crown rest on grounds stronger than those of the New-Zealanders. They are not mere wanderers over an extended surface, in search of a precarious subsistence; nor tribes of hunters, nor of herdsmen; but a people among whom the arts of government have made some progress-who have established by their own customs a division and appropriation of the soil-who are not without some measure of agricultural skill, and a certain subordination of ranks, with usages having the character and authority of the law. In addition to this, they have been formally recognised by Great Britain as an independent State; and even in assuming the dominion of the country, this principle was acknowledged, for it is on the deliberate act and cession of the chiefs, on behalf of the people at large, that our title rests. Nor should it ever be forgotten, that large bodies of the NewZealanders have been instructed by the zeal of our missionaries in the Christian Faith. It is, however, impossible to cast the eye over the map of the globe, and to discover so much as a single spot where civilized men, brought into contact with tribes differing from themselves, widely, in physical structure, and greatly inferior to themselves in military prowess and social arts, have abstained from oppressions and other evil practices. In many, the process of extermination has proceeded with appalling rapidity. Even in the absence of positive injustice, the mere contiguity and intercourse of the two races would appear to induce many moral and physical evils, fatal to the health and life of the feebler party. And it must be confessed, that after every explanation which can be found of the rapid disappearance of the aboriginal tribes in the neighbourhood of European settlements, there remains much which is obscure, and of which no well ascertained facts afford the complete solution. Be the causes, however, of this so-frequent calamity what they may, it is our duty to leave no rational experiment, for the prevention of it, unattempted. Indeed, the dread of exposing any part of

the human race to a danger so formidable, has been shown by the Marquis of Normanby, in his original instructions to you, to have been the motive which dissuaded the occupation of New-Zealand by the British Government, until the irresistible course of events had rendered the establishment of legitimate authority, there, indispensable."

This is an ample vindication of the Treaty of Waitangi, the competency of the native chiefs to make such compact, and the obligation it imposes. The hon. and learned Member for Liskeard had spoken of the Treaty with great levity. Perhaps the New Zealanders, as a body, may not exactly have known what a Treaty meant, or understood any thing of international law upon which it proceeded; but their chiefs did. Right or wrong, the Treaty was made; it exists; and its provisions and stipulations are now well understood by the New-Zealand people. It established in New-Zealand, the Sovereign power of England. The natives knew well the rights it secured to them-the august name of the Sovereign of these realms, and the character of this country, are pledged to that people, that the Treaty will be faithfully observed. No measure-no course of proceeding-no policy that does not observe the utmost good faith in respect to that Treaty, can be pursued without the most serious consequences. The least infraction of that Treaty-the least indiscretion committed now, with reference to native titles and rights, would, unquestionably, lead to the most serious and deplorable results. The military force, at present, in New-Zealand is inadequate to any emergency; the interior circumstances and features of the country are, in a military sense, formidable; and the habits and character of the natives, are such as require, if once roused, very considerable increase of force; and of other descriptions than infantry, to suppress anything like a general insurrection, and desultory movements; and I know-not why I should not now state the fact, that there is not a field gun, nor one single artillery soldier in the whole of the South Australian Colonies. I have said, that the foundations of the British Colonial Empire, were laid in Colonial Establishments, very different from that which has been attempted, with such fatal effects in New-Zealand. These were of three descriptions; Proprietary governments, Charter governments, Provincial Establishments. Proprietary governments are grants by the Crown to individuals, in the nature of feudatory principalities, with all the inferior legalities, and subordinate powers of legislation, which formerly belonged to the owners of Counties Palatine. Of the former, there does not now exist but one, that of Hudson's Bay. Charter governments are of the nature of civil corporations, with the powers of making by-laws for their own interior regu

lation. Provincial establishments, are formed by commissions issued by the Crown, which give power by royal instructions to carry it out, to make local ordinances. establish courts of law, municipal institutions, and constitute provincial legislative assemblies. In all these, the rights of the Aborigines to the soil, are distinctly admitted; and such atrocities as those committed in early days severely condemned, by Blackstone and others, as a breach of natural justice. But a new fundamental principle of Colonial law has, it seems, been discovered as announced by the noble Lord, the Member for Sunderland, in the Report of the Select Committee, drawn up by that noble Lord, and which is said never to have been controverted. It is this:

"That the uncivilized inhabitants of any country have but a qualified dominion over it, or a right of occupancy only; and that, until they establish, amongst themselves, a settled form of government, and subjugate the ground to their own uses, by the cultivation of it, they cannot grant to individuals, not of their own tribe, any portion of it, for the simple reason, that they have not themselves any individual property in it."

I should like to ask where this principle of Colonial law is to be found? I find it not in Vattell, nor in Vaughan's Reports, nor in Stokes, nor in Blackstone. It is totally inconsistent with a strict observance of the stipulations of the Treaty of Waitangi. If carried out, it would violate the native rights which we have recognised and pledged to the New-Zealand People. It would warrant a repetition of the worst atrocities of former times, which the noble Lord, the Member for London, so forcibly condemns. I suspect I know the origin of this new fundamental principle of Colonial law. It comes, I think, from the land in which the black man is a slave, and the red men of the forest have been driven and hunted from their lands, as the Seminole and other Indians have been, according to the prescription or adjudication. that Indians have no other property to the soil of their respective territories than that of mere occupancy, and that the complete title to their lands vests in the Government of the United States! Diametrically different from this have been the policy and practice of Great Britain in her adjoining possessions -the Canadas. There, the soil has been obtained by compact with the Indians. Every part of the vast region, now settled, has been obtained by regular conveyances and compacts from the native tribes. I have been a party to such compacts as a Commissioner to treat with numerous and extensive tribes, in what were then remote, unsettled parts. Every possible care is now bestowed to treat the Aborigines with justice and kindness. Large reserves of land have been set apart for them, which they cannot