– 520 –

Chapter xvi.
Colonel Whitmore.

While the Earl was lazily putting away serious considerations, Colonel Whitmore was ‘hard at work in New Zealand. After the capture of Ngatapa he returned to the west coast. Colonel McDonell and Rangihiwinui had not been idle during his absence. A scouting party from Patea found Ngutu-o-te-manu unoccupied. It had been much strengthened by Titokowaru, but he was at Tauranga-ika, near Nukumaru, and had not garrisons for all his forts. Ngutu-o-te-manu was destroyed, and large stores of potatoes found there were uncovered and left to rot. From the position of charred remains, it was inferred that Von Tempsky and the others whom McDonell had lost, “were partly eaten and partly offered up as a sacrifice by the infamous Titokowaru and his band.” On the 2nd February, Colonel Whitmore shelled Tauranga-ika,¹ and prepared to invest it on the 3rd. Titokowaru, though sheltered behind double rows of palisades backed by rifle-pits and by strong cover for marksmen, found the shell-practice fatal, and on the morning of the 3rd he was gone. His rear-guard escaped the pursuit of scouts. There was no gateway through the palisades, no egress except by underground passages. Palisaded roads traversed the interior. Wondering at Titokowaru's flight from such a stronghold, Colonel Whitmore pursued. Titokowaru retired to the forests beyond Moturoa, the scene of his recent success. He trusted apparently to ambuscades, for when ten men with their commander's permission went to collect peaches, seven were killed and one was wounded before a relieving force could go to their

– 521 –

rescue. Rangihiwinui, with a band of Arawa and Wanganui men, scoured the country without loss near Putahi.

It will be remembered that the Rev. J. Whiteley, a Wesleyan missionary, distinguished himself by his animosity against Te Rangitake, and defended the terms of the proclamation of martial law in the Maori language which Mr. Stafford sent to Taranaki in 1860. Though more than sixty years of age he laboured earnestly in his sphere,¹ strong in opinion, and vigorous in body. He had been a missionary in New Zealand in 1832. It was his custom to ride from Taranaki to different outposts on Saturday to officiate on the Sunday. On the 13th February, 1869, he was proceeding to Pukearuhe, a block-house at the White Cliffs, where Lieutenant Gascoigne with his family resided. On that day a small band of Maoris had descended on the redoubt and had slain Gascoigne, his wife, three children, and two Englishmen. As the missionary, after crossing a stream, began to ascend the hill on which stood the redoubt, he was ordered by Maori voices to go back. He rode on. A volley was fired, and his horse fell. He was seen to kneel in attitude of prayer. Another volley was fired and the brave man passed away. When the tidings reached Taranaki the bodies were taken thither for interment, and an obelisk was erected in memory of the eight persons thus slaughtered at the White Cliffs. At the time when these massacres occurred there were rumours of intended outbreaks elsewhere. Taranaki was in terror. Though there was a detachment of the 18th Regiment stationed there, it was under orders to leave in a few days. Sir George Bowen reported

– 522 –

that among the mining population on the Thames river, Fenian conspirators were tampering with the Hau Haus. A Fenian flag was sent to the Maori king by men with the Irish patronymics of O'Connor and O'Neil, the former of whom, with the vanity which made Wolfe Tone admire himself in French clothing in Paris, exhibited to the Maoris a photograph of himself in Fenian uniform. Plaintively, the Governor thought it unfortunate that these things should occur, and that the entire withdrawal of the English soldiers should take place on the eve of the arrival of the Duke of Edinburgh in the colony. With this faint hint that Fenian assassins might endeavour to complete in New Zealand the work essayed in Sydney, Sir George Bowen promised to inform Earl Granville of the progress of events. He was mistaken if he thought that any danger to the Duke of Edinburgh in New Zealand would alarm Earl Granville in London. Meanwhile, no mercy was expected for or from Te Kooti or Titokowaru. The former, with a band of unknown numbers, swooped down to the Bay of Plenty from the Uriwera mountains early in March, scaring the settlers and their families to redoubts at Tauranga and Opotiki, capturing a pah from Maoris loyal to the Queen, destroying a settlement at Whakatane, and killing all who resisted. Kereopa was said to be with him. An old French settler sold his life dearly, defending his house. From the deck of a steamer Te Kooti himself was seen galloping about on a grey horse, conspicuous with a red shirt, boots and breeches, with a sword by his side, and four revolvers in his belt. Mounted orderlies approached him with a military salute and went to do his bidding. He was then reconnoitring a position held by Major Mair near the mouth of the Whakatane river, with a mixed force of 200 Europeans and Maoris. In a short time Te Kooti's army dwindled away, and he retreated to his mountain fastnesses, followed by Major Mair, who was strengthened by an accession of 200 Arawas. At Tauaroa, Te Kooti seemed brought to bay one night, but in the morning only his departing rear-guard was in sight. Major Mair accused his Arawa friends of backwardness. They were thought to shrink from the rugged Uriwera country and its fierce inhabitants. Some of the Arawa complained that the Government would not pay them sufficiently for their toils.

– 523 –

Meanwhile, Colonel Whitmore and Rangihiwinui pursued Titokowaru on the west coast. Early in March, with about 600 men, an advance was made up the Patea river. Titokowaru's camp was taken. Rangihiwinui commanded the right column, and dashed into the camp so promptly that baggage and moveables were left indiscriminately behind. Rangihiwinui, allowing his men little time to plunder the camp, pushed on, driving the enemy before him. Titokowaru escaped by swimming the river, Rangihiwinui's rapidity having prevented the fugitives from crossing by the main ford. Colonel Whitmore reported (14th March) that though the enemy's actual loss was small, his ignominious flight must ruin his reputation irretrievably. To follow him in tangled forests was difficult. Colonel Whitmore regretted that Ropata with the Ngatiporou was not with him. The value of “so intelligent a chief at the head of the bravest ‘hapu’ of the best bush tribe in New Zealand” it would be impossible to exaggerate.

Great efforts were made to induce Ropata to lead some of his men to the west. In 1868 the Government had accepted an offer made by Mr. Donald McLean to aid in securing the co-operation of the Maoris at Hawke's Bay and the east coast. Ropata arrived at Napier with 80 followers, and consulted McLean, having no desire to go to the west without Mr. McLean's concurrence. McLean by telegraph dissuaded the expedition. The Ministry persisted. Ropata declined to go, alleging that his absence from his district invited attack. The recruiting officer persuaded 19 of the men to go with him. The rest were obedient to Ropata. Angrily declaring that McLean had set “a vicious example” by dissuading Ropata, Mr. Stafford removed McLean from his agency for the Government. The English residents in the surrounding districts passed strong resolutions favourable to McLean and hostile to the Ministry. They prayed that the General Assembly might be convened. Mr. Stafford became less petulant. It was plain to him and to them that by needless insult of a man so trusted as McLean with regard to native affairs generally, and so influential in the districts kept in terror by Te Kooti, he had done much to convert the scant majority of 1868 into a minority in 1869. The friendly Maoris also were offended. Karaitiana Takamoana declared that he

– 524 –

had besought Ropata not to go away,—that Mr. McLean was not the dissuader, and that “if he fall the whole of the Maoris of this coast will fall with him.” As it was well known that without Rangihiwinui on the west, and Ropata on the east, the English appeared to disadvantage in the field, and as the east coast Maoris were unwilling to serve under Colonel Whitmore without the chiefs in whom they trusted, it might be affirmed that from the date of their insulting Mr. McLean the doom of the Stafford Ministry was certain. Failing to obtain the aid of Ropata, Colonel Whitmore devised other plans. “If (he wrote) the Ngatiporou are unavailable, and hounds to carry the trail considered to be improper agents for the purpose, I would suggest that some Australian blacks should be engaged to supply what only very great practice can give to Europeans, and what I have not got in this force—the faculty of tracking fugitives in the bush.” Scorned in his own country, except when his unrivalled hunting and tracking powers were required by Europeans in pursuit of game or of his brethren, in an hour of need the Australian became the hope of the leader of the forces of New Zealand. At the head of 350 men, Rangihiwinui, having ascertained that the enemy were in full retreat to Whakamaru, pushed forward, discovered their camp, sent back for the armed constabulary, and placing them in concealment in front, made a circuit to enclose Titokowaru in rear. Colonel Whitmore arrived at the front. The harangues of Titokowaru and others were distinctly heard. All hearts were exultant at the thought that in a short time Rangihiwinui would bar the retreat, when a mounted rebel, said to have been Katene (McDonell's quondam guide), rode almost into Colonel Whitmore's hands, discovered his danger, fired his revolver, and galloped back to his friends. Colonel Whitmore advanced, but Titokowaru was gone. Rangihiwinui, “after his men had cooked, continued the pursuit, and at sunset fell in with their rear. They attempted to lay an ambuscade for Rangghiwinui's advance, but were attacked so quickly and with such determination that they could not hold their ground; but they sprang off rapidly and dispersed so quickly, after delivering their fire, that only one could be killed. Rangihiwinui, however, pressed on, clambering up a precipice, forcing him to abandon an already

– 525 –

prepared sleeping-place, and inflicting some loss in this and similar skirmishes during the following day.” Titokowaru was in full retreat towards Te Ngaere. To it Colonel Whitmore said, “no guide could be found to show the way, but Rangihiwinui with his usual intelligence made it out correctly.” Across the treacherous marsh three large kaingas or villages were seen. No fires were lit in the English camp, screened as it was by tangled growth on the forest margin. The hapu of Ahitana, not hostile to the English, was known to be peaceably residing at Te Ngaere, but Colonel Whitmore was sure that Titokowaru was there also. At night a woman's voice was heard summoning the Maoris: “Come hither, ye brave, come hither to the food.” By means of long hurdles made on the spot the attacking forces were transported across the swamp at daylight on the 25th March. They saw some Maoris apparently escaping, and others approaching the new-comers with the friendly welcome, “Haere mai.” In this manner the son of Ahitana met Colonel Whitmore, who suspected the villagers of aiding the escape of Titokowaru, who was gone towards Te-Ngutu-o-te-manu. Colonel Whitmore came to the conclusion that about 70 of Titokowaru's people were present at the surprise of Te Ngaere, and walked off while the son of Ahitana met the English commander. Rangihiwinui having traversed the country and ascertained that Titokowaru had fled, the Wanganui men returned to their homes, and Colonel Whitmore marched to Taranaki. A few stragglers dead, or dying of inanition, were seen by Rangihiwinui, but the rebel leader had made his way to the Upper Waitara, north of Taranaki. Scouting parties were left to defend the settlements, and Colonel Whitmore proceeded by way of Auckland to the east coast. A marauding expedition, under a detachment of the Wanganui militia, destroyed at various places on the Waitotara river, settlements, cultivations, eel-weirs, and, in its commander's phrase, “any stock we could not eat.” Scattered families fled in terror from it. At one pah a decrepit old woman was left to fly a small white flag, but she did not save the dwellings.

Amidst all these wars and the wild rumours to which they gave birth, Te Rangitake and his followers loyally kept the peace at Waitara, and refused to Titokowaru a passage through

– 526 –

through their territory. Mr. Parris reported that he had only to speak, and he would command the support of all Maoris unfriendly to the English. But Rangitake kept his pledge of peace. Under these circumstances Te Kooti was deemed more dangerous than the routed Titokowaru, and it was resolved to discontinue the campaign in the west, with reference to which the Minister of Defence, Colonel Haultain, writing in April to the Governor, added his tribute to the general praise of Rangihiwinui's “courage and resource as remarkable as his modesty and devotion.”

When Major Mair abandoned his pursuit at Tauaroa, Te Kooti remained at Ahikereru, whence he could make prompt raids either upon the Bay of Plenty, on Napier, or Wairoa, or could reach Rotorua, or the Waikato, as he might choose. The Civil Commission at Tauranga urged an immediate expedition to crush the freebooter, while short of ammunition. On Saturday, the 10th April, he appeared, where least expected, to supply his wants. He treacherously captured a pah (Huke), on the coast at Mohaka (about 40 miles from Napier), murdered the inmates, 7 Europeans and 57 Maoris, destroyed all habitations, and made off with some casks of ammunition and a few rifles. There was a small pah (Hiruharama) at Mohaka, in which Ihaka Whanga and others defended themselves successfully for two days, and Te Kooti beat a retreat before 400 of the Napier militia arrived to learn that the marauders had escaped with their booty. Colonel Whitmore hastened to the scene, and with armed constabulary and allied Maoris carried war into the Uriwera territory. Colonel Herrick with one force, Colonel St. John with another, and Whitmore with a third, traversed the land, but vainly sought to bring Te Kooti to a pitched battle or to sustain a siege. They captured pahs after desultory skirmishing from rifle-pits, and found them empty. On one occasion the retiring conquerors saw the enemy, of whose immediate proximity they had been unconscious, march quietly into the camp which had been left by the constabulary and the Arawa. Te Kooti himself, after his raid at Mohaka, returned through his mountain fastnesses only to hear at Waikaremoana that Ruatahuna had fallen into the hands of his enemies. He despatched some followers to dog the retiring forces, and took

– 527 –

up a central position from which he might guide his adherents and march suddenly to the interior or to the coast. Want of ammunition distressed him; and the winter cold pinched bitingly those who had scant store of food.

The season had its terrors for the allies. The Arawa declined to march beyond Ruatahuna. Great efforts were made to persuade Ropata Wahawaha of what was called his “sulkiness,” but it was found that his counsel could not be dispensed with, and that without him his countrymen distrusted the capacity of the Pakeha leaders to cope with the wily Te Kooti. How that hunted robber could retain an army seemed mysterious. Outnumbered always, he was not deserted. To a cunning which availed itself of every art of vantage, he joined the show of pious belief. A native gave an account of a meeting at which for five hours he addressed assembled chiefs, and persuaded several to flock to his standard. That which the Ministry dreaded was his escape into the territory of the Maori king, where his influence might stir the latent fanaticism of Tawhiao's adherents.

From his post of espial Te Kooti watched the colonial forces, some of whom were stationed at Fort Galatea on the Rangitaike river. He waylaid troopers with despatches. Colonel St. John was about to go from Fort Galatea to Lake Taupo, to arrange for such an occupation of posts as might foil Te Kooti if he should endeavour to pass towards Waikato. Te Kooti cautiously followed an escort party. At Opepe his advance-guard saw smoke arising where they had thought there was no inhabitant. A body of troopers was there. Te Kooti sent scouts into various ravines to prevent escape, and ordered picked men to saunter up as if they were Arawas, friendly to the English—to go between the troopers and their arms, and to massacre them. The device succeeded. The men were deceived. Ten troopers were reported as killed. A sergeant with two men escaped to Fort Galatea. Te Kooti had not succeeded in making away with Colonel St. John, who, fortunately, had with four others ridden forward before Te Kooti arrived at Opepe. But all the ammunition with the escort party was seized. The successful marauder passed on and murdered 21 Maoris at a village before he took up his abode at Lake Taupo. There he persuaded Te Heu Heu to join him, and thence, after some time, with a powerful

– 528 –

band, he went to Tokangamutu to confer with the Maori king.

What the Ministry most feared had come to pass. When in June they heard that Te Kooti had slain the troopers at Opepe, they knew that there was nothing to bar his way to Waikato. At that time also Mr. Stafford had to encounter an eager Opposition, strengthened by Donald McLean, whom Mr. Stafford had gratuitously insulted and removed from office at Napier. To add to their troubles, some of the armed constabulary at Fort Galatea mutinied, demanding more food; and the Colonel in command was powerless. The Ministry which could complacently approve the slaughter of prisoners, lost temper at remonstrance. They were irritated beyond measure at the thought that two men, wantonly driven to resistance, were able with a few undisciplined enthusiasts to foil the colonial forces. In the North Island there were altogether more than 2000 Europeans and 1000 Maoris maintained in the field to crush the two bandits who defied the Government. In the armed constabulary the men received five shillings a day. The militia and the Maoris were paid alike; receiving four shillings a day, with an additional shilling when serving outside of their own districts. Scouts received eight shillings a day for carrying their lives in their hands. While battling with the discord which he had, in 1860, done so much to create, Mr. Stafford was further provoked by a polite but galling remonstrance from Earl Granville. The Earl observed in the newspapers that a reward of £1000 had been offered for Titokowaru—he inferred alive or dead—and £5 for every Maori rebel brought in alive. He pronounced no opinion, but thought such steps at variance with the usual laws of war. The Governor's despatches had been silent on this and on other questions, such as the breach of faith with the exiles at the Chatham Islands; and the arbitrary seizure of Maoris as hostages on the west coast, which was thought to have produced Titokowaru's outbreak. The Earl wished for explanations. It would have been difficult for a Governor to explain either his complicity or silence. Sir George Bowen contented himself with sending a memorandum from Mr. Stafford. As to Titokowaru, “the report which has reached the Colonial Office is exactly true, as also the inference drawn by his Lordship that it

– 529 –

was implied in the offer that the reward would be given for the body of Titokowaru, alive or dead. Ministers regret if this offer has not been reported in the copious minutes of events furnished to his Excellency by every mail. It is right now to add that a similar reward on the same terms has been offered for the body of Te Kooti.” The offers were exceptional as were the atrocities which produced them, but were not without precedent in the history of India, or of “Fenian outrages in the heart of the United Kingdom.” Mr. Stafford condescended to no further explanation. The colony must, he said, be content to bear the “censures of unreflecting critics.” A more careful defence was made by the Under-Secretary for Native Affairs. It was admitted that, in the matter of supposed horse-stealing, the high-handed carrying away of hostages by Colonel McDonell was irregular, but not that it had any direct bearing on the subsequent acts of Titokowaru. It was admitted that hostages and prisoners were seized; that three of them were released; that a fourth, Ihaka, was remanded for a week; that he escaped from durance, and was present at the murders which a few days afterwards, “according to Maori custom, commenced open war.” At a later date Earl Granville returned to the subject, when his attention was drawn to a newspaper statement that Mr. J. C. Richmond, at Ngatapa, offered £50 for the head of Nikora, £500 for that of Te Kooti, and £1 per head for others, who were shot as soon as brought in. He could make every allowance for indignation at Te Kooti's atrocities, and would not deny the necessity of extraordinary measures, but “a general offer to savages of £1 for every head brought in” was calculated to intensify the worst characteristics of the Maori nature, and to breed in the relatives of the victims a thirst for revenge.

Strange are the contradictions of the human mind! The same high functionary who would make no effort to wipe off the stain cast upon England's scutcheon by the killing of a prisoner of war, now called upon others to do what he had set them the example of shunning. “The statement that prisoners are shot as soon as they arrive is unaccompanied by any information as to what steps are taken to secure that the persons so put to death have been implicated in any of the more criminal acts of the rebels.”

– 530 –

Mr. Richmond was not an unprofitable pupil in Earl Granville's school. He had paid £50 for the head of Nikora. He would have paid £1000 for Te Kooti dead or alive. He said nothing about the deaths of flying men and women shot on the chance that the pursuer had Te Kooti in view. He had offered £5 for every Chatham Island refugee brought in alive, and “in two or three cases the reward had been claimed.” One of such prisoners was afterwards killed; but it was believed that the killer's child had been previously killed by the prisoner. There was an inquest, but the jury returned an open verdict, the neighbours “sympathizing, not unpardonably,” with the accused. If suggestions of censure on the Colonial Government were to be founded on newspaper statements, it could retort by urging that the London ‘Times’ had in February, 1869, advised that the hands of the colonists should be free to choose their measures; that “the two races must be left to settle accounts with each other.” Another English paper had said that the Maoris would perish; but it was not England's business to save them from the consequences of their own acts. This, Mr. Richmond said, was “no doubt cool philosophy,” but colonists had long ago said that if the two races were left to fight out their quarrel over New Zealand soil, the Maori must be swept away, and the nonintervention by England “practically admitted” that it was no business of hers.

Sir G. Bowen was more diplomatic than Mr. Richmond. He explained that Colonel Haultain was absolutely unpopular with the press because he would not yield to the clamour which called for a reward of £5 for every Maori head brought in. He urged that the Colonial Government was endeavouring to mitigate the horrors. He wrote as if he expected to be believed. He claimed no credit for having warned the Secretary of State that horrors would not be averted by the removal of British troops. On a recent occasion the thirst for Maori “utu” was so strong that it was “with extreme difficulty that Maori allies were induced to refrain from indulging in their turn in a cannibal feast” upon the bodies of Hau Haus who had slain some of their relations. He did not explain why he had made no representations on the subject at an earlier date.

Earl Granville was charmed with the “cool philosophy” which

– 531 –

Mr. Richmond echoed back to England. “The subject is one on which I am myself glad to be satisfied, and the present despatch will show that your Ministry repudiated and held in check those feelings of ungoverned animosity which must necessarily prevail in certain portions of a community situated like that of New Zealand.” He delicately hinted, however, that there was a lurking repugnance in Englishmen to condone atrocities, and that when excesses, to some extent “excusable in proportion to outrages on the other side,” occurred, the Imperial Government could “not escape the duty of sifting, by way of reference to the Governor, the truth of the reports which reached England. Indeed” (he added) “it is often impossible to prevent the expression of public opinion against cruelties committed even in foreign countries with which England has no constitutional connection whatever.” Not the crime under his cognizance, but the consequence of its exposure before a blunt English public, had terrors for the Earl. Had he been prescient of a few short years, he would have known that he and his party would be found striving to do what he almost complained of as impossible to prevent. Politicians out of office often find sweet morsels in that which they reject as poison when in power.

In a later despatch (7th July), Sir George Bowen expatiated on the “strong comments” made in the New Zealand Parliament and press upon Earl Granville's interference. The Attorney-General supplied a paper to prove that the natives had no rights under the treaty of Waitangi; that they were included under the Queen's sovereignty; that the rebels had no belligerent rights; and that their conduct had “forfeited all title to the observance towards them of the usages of war, if they ever had such title.” Unwilling to put forward ministerial arguments as his own, Sir George Bowen introduced some of them as current in New Zealand. Why blame a Ministry for measures less stringent than those in Canada, India, Ireland, Ceylon, Cephalonia? Earl Granville disclaimed any desire to interfere. “As to the supposed questioner (whose arguments you appear to adopt), I am not prepared to inquire whether the most severe acts of Lord Seaton, Sir H. Ward, and Lord Torrington, were those for which they were held entitled to public

– 532 –

approval.” As to Titokowaru, the Earl hardly understood the Governor's meaning. He seemed to disclaim the application of martial law, but there was no colonial enactment enabling any chance person to shoot down a murderer untried. When the Earl's despatch was received, the New Zealand Attorney-General (Prendergast) was brought forward to counteract it. He argued that the safety of the State justified the acts of the Government. He quoted books which held that felons fleeing might be shot down, and wrote as if such statements justified the indiscriminate slaughter of Maoris with whom the Queen had entered into a solemn treaty. It was very needless to urge such a defence. Nothing was wanted to repress the humanity of Earl Granville.

Before confronting the General Assembly on the 1st June, the Government, well aware that their discourtesy to Mr. McLean was a danger in their path, strove to make terms with the Maori king.

It will be remembered that soon after Sir G. Bowen's arrival in New Zealand he described the capture and restitution of cattle taken from Mr. Firth as analogous to the Highland raids depicted by Sir Walter Scott in ‘Waverley.’ Mr. Firth, who had followed various callings in Auckland, as a trader in bricks, a miller and merchant, and had in the Assembly supported by his vote the Taranaki war and confiscation of Maori lands, had, after the close of the Waikato war, devoted his attention to the acquisition of a landed estate by peaceful negotiations, which the Land Court Act of 1865 might protect. He had recourse especially to Waharoa the king-maker, through whose patronage he acquired leasehold property convertible (and converted) into freehold. On learning Earl Granville's accession to office, Mr. Firth wrote an elaborate letter on the critical position of the colony in consequence of what he called “the policy of abandonment” adopted by the English Government, which was calculated “to deprive the Crown of a valuable colony, and might lead to the destruction of Her Majesty's colonial empire.” He had used the influence which attached to the friend of the king-maker; and had besought the advisers of the Maori king to discountenance the atrocities of Titokowaru and Te Kooti, chiefs not of high birth.

Divisions in the king's council had prevented Tawhiao from

– 533 –

taking strong measures to coerce Te Kooti; but to “the singularly peaceful attitude maintained by the Maori king” was due the absence of a “general rising among the tribes.” Yet bands of armed murderers traversed the country. The Queen's laws were the scorn of rebels, and were regarded as a mockery by the loyal. The laws of the Maori king were becoming weaker. Anarchy was near. At Poverty Bay three Hau Haus were captured by loyal Maoris. A settler, whose son had been murdered, called on Major Westrup to avenge his son. Major Westrup declined. The settler, with a friend, went to the Maori allies and demanded the death of the captives. A firing-party levelled their arms, and one of the Hau Haus fell dead. The others escaped in the darkness, though one was wounded.

To such a condition was the Imperial policy reducing the colony. Nay, on the judicial bench at Nelson had just occurred a scene of like significance. Mr. Justice Richmond, the former colleague of Mr. Stafford, had declared, “it had now become impossible to carry out the ordinary law in the ordinary way in the North Island…. If we were to be burdened with the responsibilities of independence we should also be permitted to enjoy its powers.” Mr. Firth thought that when a Judge could utter such words “judicially, a very vital and radical change must shortly take place in the relations between England and her colony of New Zealand.” Yet the colonists contemplated a rupture with the mother country only “as a bitter and cruel necessity” imposed by the Imperial policy of abandonment. If Her Majesty's new advisers should adhere to it as irrevocable, “then ancient Rome would not have been the only empire to teach the world that the decay of national spirit is but the precursor of the decay of national power.” Sir G. Bowen in sending Mr. Firth's letter, said: “I am informed that Mr. Firth's opinions are also expressed by a large portion of the press and the general public, especially in the North Island.” It is almost needless to say that Mr. Firth's anticipations did not disturb Earl Granville's equanimity. A leading journal in Sydney said: “In the face of this danger the 18th Regiment is peremptorily recalled. In dealing with such subjects the Liberal Ministry have hardly been so successful as their predecessors. The Conservative Government has shown itself more anxious for the honour of the

– 534 –

nation than for its gold.… The Maori king does not, for the moment, take part in the war. Everything will depend on his views and conduct. If he should rise, all will rise.… Sir George Bowen has a task of immense difficulty—one which will require consummate skill and patience.” These and other expressions of opinion Sir G. Bowen forwarded to Earl Granville, who merely acknowledged their receipt. He behaved with scant courtesy to the Governor. Though with Mr. Richmond's “cool philosophy” about rewards he was “glad to be satisfied” —he did not relieve Sir G. Bowen from implied censure in the matter, although it was admitted by Colonel Haultain that the Ministry neither brought the subject before the Executive Council nor advertised the rewards in the ‘New Zealand Gazette.’

The arrival (April, 1869) of the Duke of Edinburgh, whom the Maoris styled “the Queen's Son,” produced no change. The Maori king was not prevailed upon to meet him. He would take time to consider the question. Mr. Stafford postponed the meeting of the General Assembly, partly because it would have interfered with the reception of the Prince in the provinces, and partly because in the absence of the Treasurer (Mr. Fitzherbert) in England, he was unable properly to deal with financial measures. Wherever the Duke arrived he was received with the profuse loyalty which characterized his tour in Australia. Maori chiefs presented to him green-stone heirlooms prized for centuries. Tamihana te Rauparaha, the son of the dreaded chief who laid waste the country around Cook's Straits, presented one which had been renowned in song and tradition. He was childless, and said:— “As my house is gone like the moa, I bequeath the talisman of my fathers to the son of the Queen of England and of New Zealand.” A meeting, called by the Maori king at Hangatiki, on which the minds of all the English in the North were intent, took place in the end of April. Three thousand five hundred persons attended, of whom 1700 were men in arms. To the relief of the Government the speeches, though couched in ambiguous terms, were pronounced to be peaceful in tendency, and complicity with the atrocities of Titokowaru and Te Kooti was disclaimed. Tamati Ngapora, the king's chief counsellor, who had taken a new name, Manuhiri, had consented to permit Mr. Searancke, the resident magistrate in the Waikato and

– 535 –

Raglan districts, to be present at the meeting. Only one other European, Mr. Louis Hettit, a Frenchman married to a chief's daughter, was present; and Hettit had always been permitted to live on the confines of the king's territory. He was married to a relative of Rewi. Natives loyal to the Queen had been invited, and many were there. The first greetings between them and their hosts, Mr. Searancke was not permitted to see; but a war-dance, in which 160 guests and 400 of the king's men with double-barrelled guns took part, he saw. Speeches followed the dance. One thing seemed remarkable. The king's people had changed their names. All baptismal names had been cast away and old Maori names taken in their places; just as before the Greeks threw off the Turkish yoke they christened their children by names enshrined in ancient story. Tamati Ngapora's name, Manuhiri, described the condition in which his exile placed him. It signified that he was a “guest.” Rewi had become Manga. Nevertheless, his speech was peaceable and straightforward. He admitted that he had formerly done much to create war, but declared that he had now put it away from him. The Aukati, or pale, was strictly enforced against all who were not invited to the meeting. Europeans who strove to accompany invited Maoris were stayed at the boundary. Wiremu te Wheoro, a constant ally of the English, was listened to with profound attention. When he said—”I will return to my place and my treasures (ancestral home), and never will I leave Waikato—the land of my forefathers and my treasures—no, never, never, never,”—the hearts of his hearers throbbed at the thought that they were exiled, their lands were confiscated, the tombs of their fathers profaned by the stranger. For several minutes after Te Wheoro's speech there was silence as among the dead. Not only his words but his character gave him weight. The king-maker had always averred that Te Wheoro was the best of the Waikatos on the side of the Queen. The frank manliness of his appearance would have sufficed to make friends in any part of the world. Though duskier than many of his countrymen his features were of a cast common in Europe. So much importance was now attached by Mr. Stafford to a friendly arrangement with the Maori king that the Queen's son was induced to delay his

– 536 –

departure from New Zealand in the hope that he might meet Tawhiao at Ngaruawahia. Mr. Firth negotiated with Tawhiao, with the cognizance, but not as the envoy, of the Government. The General Assembly was to meet on the 1st June, and Mr. Firth started on his mission on the 27th May. It was thought that favourable terms concluded with the Maori king would foil the onslaught of Mr. Fox, though strengthened by Donald McLean. Mr. C. O. Davis and Mr. Preece accompanied Mr. Firth. The meeting took place at Orahiri on the 1st June. A prayer was offered by Te Aroha. A hymn was sung. A special reporter of the ‘Southern Cross’ newspaper was astonished by the beautiful thoughts of the prayer and the deep reverential tones of the voices joining in unison with the chant,—”Matua, pai marire, rire, rire; Tamaiti, pai marire, rire, rire; Wairua, pai marire, rire rire !” — “Father, good and gracious, grace, grace; Son, good and gracious, grace, grace; Spirit, good and gracious, grace, grace.” Long conferences ensued. Whitiora te Kumete, who in battle at Rangiriri won admiration from friends and foes, now obtained the same tribute for his manly aspect and oratory. Tamati Ngapora, or Manuhiri, was the central figure, in whom the reporter found grace, ease, and dignity. Long colloquy took place between the chief and the interpreter Davis. When the former said, “While we talk of peace there is fighting,” Davis replied, “Why don't you stop the fighting?” The chief answered: “Why don't you stop it?” “Has all ‘mana’ (power, authority) been taken from you?” asked the interpreter. “Has all ‘mana’ been taken away from you, that you do not put a stop to this fighting?” retorted the chief. The first day's conference was resultless. Sorrow mingled with proud resolution pervaded the speech of the chiefs on the second day. “The land is like a stricken bird whose wings are quivering on account of the pain.… To what do you allude when you wish us to speak out? Is it in relation to the streams of thought that day by day and from season to season we each derive separately from the Almighty? You have one stream and I have another, and we each ought to work out the thoughts that present themselves to our minds.… The times have not yet come for terms of peace. The times are in God's hands. If this be the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet which is to come to pass in the last

– 537 –

days, what can be done to prevent it?” Mr. Davis said the business of the day was to do duty towards fellow-men, and not to refer to Daniel's predictions about other events. After long silence Te Aroha said: “Jehovah of Hosts lives, and He has said that peace shall never be made. There was a covenant with Noah, and the sign of it was the rainbow. There was another dispensation and another covenant; and now, in these days, Jehovah of Hosts has said there shall be no peace for ever on the earth.” Mr. Davis replied that Jehovah of Hosts lived, but desired that men should live like brethren. Te Aroha replied: “Turn round and work among your own people. I will work on this side, and as the days go on, the Almighty will be a Judge between us.” Questioned as to terms, Te Aroha said that restoration of the Waikato as far as the post erected before the war at Maungatawhiri was demanded. “Our word has gone forth that the striking of man by man should cease. Now, then, do your part. Remove your armies, for my messengers cannot pass through.” Mr. Firth, interpreted by Mr. Preece, addressed Tamati Ngapora and the other chiefs. He spoke of the Queen's son;—of the deceased king-maker. He did not represent the Government, but believed that the king would be assented to in a certain district. On this Tamati Ngapora remarked: “It is a matter of indifference to us whether you consent or not. We shall have him.” Mr. Firth spoke of murders. The chief said: “What you call murders are not murders according to our custom, because when war begins, the rule is to kill all you see.” Whitiora said: “If I were to kill you now that you are here on a friendly visit, that would be a murder. If I inveigle you under friendly guise, and then kill you, that is foul murder. And here are your foul murders. General Cameron told us to send our women and children to Rangiaohia where they should remain unmolested; but he went away from Paterangi, with his soldiers, after them, and the women and children were killed and some of them burnt in the houses. You did not go to fight the men; you left them and went away to fight with the women and little children. These things you conceal because they are faults on your side, but anything on our side you set down against us, and open your mouths wide to proclaim it. That

– 538 –

deed of yours was a foul murder, and yet there is nobody to proclaim it.”

Mr. Firth continued his oration, and asked for a letter stating the wishes of the chiefs. Ngapora replied: “You are our letter. We Maoris consider it sufficient to speak face to face.” There was more discussion, in the course of which Mr. Firth blamed Rewi for sending men to fight at Taranaki. “Hold there,” interrupted Ngapora; “did not the Europeans go from Auckland?” Mr. Firth replied evasively. “Answer my question direct. Did not the Europeans go from Auckland to Waitara?” retorted the chief. He was told that soldiers did. “How about your Governor,—did not he go?” Mr. Preece said a Governor was not a colonist. Governors were moveable like soldiers. The colonists had not gone to Waitara. “Te Aroha: By whose authority did the soldiers go to Taranaki? Preece: By that of the Governor, the servant of the Queen, not by the Pakehas of the soil. Ngapora: Cease this: you are holding a Court. It would take days to decide. Preece: It would take months. A chief: Years.” There was a long pause. Mr. Firth could only report that he believed the Maoris would be content with the acknowledgment of their king, the stoppage of fighting, a general amnesty, and the restoration of all Waikato. They had not accepted his suggestion that the recognition of the king should be limited to a certain district, and that only portions of Waikato land should be restored to the homeless. Ngapora laid stress upon a letter he had received from Sir William Martin recognizing that all Waikato ought to be restored. Sir William Martin subsequently published his letter in Maori and in English. It then appeared that his proposals were similar to those of Mr. Firth, coupled with earnest and eloquent appeals to Tawhiao and Ngapora to repress “the senseless men, the shedders of blood.” Hearing that they were doing so had caused a gleam of light to arise in his heart. Contemporaneously with this fruitless meeting, Te Wheoro strove to bring about at Ngaruawahia a meeting between Tawhiao and the Duke of Edinburgh. On the 1st June, 400 natives were gathered there. They waited ten days only to find that Tawhiao would not meet the Governor or the son of the Queen. He sent fifty men with a letter to Te Wheoro declaring that they went to see the Prince. “If they

– 539 –

do not, they can come back. That is all.” Fortunately the Prince was too wise to go to Ngaruawahia to encounter disappointment. The Government having failed to bring about the meeting threw blame on the officiousness of Mr. Firth. Towards Te Wheoro there was sympathy even among the king's friends. It was allowed that he had not been justly dealt with, and the final reconciliation of the king was attributed by some to the working of this feeling on the minds of the king's counsellors. Whatever expectations Mr. Stafford had founded on the “mana” of the Queen's son were disappointed.

The General Assembly met on the 1st June. The Prince departed. The field was open for attack upon the Government. Mr. Creighton moved vainly for returns concerning the rewards offered for capture of Titokowaru, Te Kooti, and others. Fox and McLean carried motions for returns. There was no contest on the Address. A proposition for a loan was accepted, and the Governor's hope that in asking for an Imperial guarantee “the last prayer” of the colony to the mother-country might not be rejected was echoed by the House of Representatives, while the Council qualified the application by calling it an “appeal.” A motion for Supply was postponed for a week, and, before the week had elapsed, Fox had moved and McLean had seconded, a brief motion: “That this House has no confidence in the present Government.” Mr. Stafford fought hard for the post he had wrested from Mr. Weld. Adjournment succeeded adjournment. On the 23rd June, Mr. Carleton vainly strove to ward off the blow by moving as an amendment, that “proposals for meeting existing difficulties ought to have preceded any question of personal confidence.” On the 24th June, by 40 votes against 29, Mr. Fox's motion was carried. Mete Kingi Paetahi and Tareha voted with Mr. McLean for the expulsion of the man who had brought so much misery on their country in former days. Mr. Fox became Colonial Secretary and Premier; Mr. Vogel combined the office of Treasurer with sundry others; Mr. Donald McLean became Native Minister and Minister for Colonial Defence; Mr. Dillon Bell, a member of the first responsible Ministry in 1856; and Dr. Featherston, a colleague of Mr. Fox in 1861, cast in their fortunes with Mr. Fox, as they doubtless supposed, but with Mr. Vogel as it proved in fact. Great hopes

– 540 –

were founded on McLean's accession to power. He addressed the chiefs as he would address the heads of ancient Highland clans whom, he said, they resembled. He relied on personal influence and his own word rather than on law. This, which was a trouble to his colleagues, commended him to the Maoris. It also fostered his own vanity, and caused him to disparage arrangements not made by himself. Nevertheless, such was his reputation, that from the time of his joining the Ministry in 1869 until his death at the end of 1876 he was in office as Native Minister with the exception of one brief month in 1872. Ministries were formed and transformed under Messrs. Fox, Waterhouse, Fox, Vogel, Pollen, Vogel, Atkinson, but amongst them ever was Donald McLean. He had ample funds at his disposal; and, squatted on the ground in a Maori whare. smoking the pipe of peace with his host¹ and conversing in his language, he was the dispenser of sums at which the lords of the clan of his ancestors would have gazed in astonishment, and of which he did not keep the accurate records usually required by the Treasury.

Mr. Cracroft Wilson, a supporter of Mr. Stafford, on the 30th June, before the new Ministry was fully constituted, failed to carry resolutions praying for troops. The resolutions did not emerge from Committee. On the 7th July, Mr. Fox obtained leave to go into Committee on a resolution declaring that the existing expenditure on colonial forces was altogether beyond the resources of the colony, and could not be maintained consistently with the public credit. On the 13th, Mr. Stafford moved an amendment, to the effect that more information as to Ways and Means was necessary to justify the House in adopting Mr. Fox's resolution, but by 37 votes against 31 Mr. Fox's motion was finally adopted. It had little significance except as connected with a motion on the same day by Mr. Donald McLean to send Commissioners to England empowered to ask for two regiments, and to pledge the colony to pay £40 per man at the end of each year. On the 22nd July, both Houses carried resolutions praying the Governor to move General Chute to delay the departure of the 18th Regiment, “pending further reference to the Imperial Government.” On the 3rd August, Mr. McLean substituted other resolutions in Committee. One

– 541 –

declared that the threatening aspect of affairs in the north and financial exhaustion made it impossible for the colony to supply garrisons and to resist rebels. Others urged that a final appeal should be made to the mother-country for troops,—1500 men engaged for five years, and to be maintained by the colony as might be arranged,—that the colony should provide an efficient constabulary force; that Commissioners should at once be sent to England to negotiate with the Imperial Government, having full power to determine whether to “employ Ghoorkas or any other body of disciplined men.” Mr. Stafford, when in office, had endeavoured to cause the retention of Imperial troops without condescending to ask for them. On the 8th August, 1868, he ostentatiously remarked that since October, 1865, he had declined to advise the employment of British troops in the field, or to accede to formal conditions on which the regiment in New Zealand should be retained. Sir George Bowen in an official minute, 12th December, 1868, warned him that it was “possible that the Home Government may have taken Ministers at their word, and that General Chute may have received instructions accordingly.” Mr. Stafford nevertheless declared that the Home Government broke faith by not supplying troops on the terms contained in Earl Carnarvon's despatch of 1866; viz. that £50,000 should be annually expended on native purposes. These terms (though they had been promptly rejected by Mr. Stafford) he contended were “virtually fulfilled” by the colony, and therefore, in October, 1868, with the help of Mr. Fox, he carried a resolution asking the Governor to delay the departure of the 18th Regiment. Earl Granville had pointed out the inaccuracy of Mr. Stafford's contention, and that gentleman was constrained to plead that, though Earl Carnarvon's offer had never been formally accepted, it had been complied with in practice, and that the resolution of October, 1868, was a formal acceptance of the terms offered in 1866. Pressure of events made Mr. Stafford change his policy but not confess that he had done so. He resented Earl Granville's exposition of the case, and professed, in May, 1869, to adhere to his own. He was now out of office, face to face with the question. He dared not to adhere to his self-reliant theories openly, but strove to qualify Mr. McLean's proposal by an amendment limiting the

– 542 –

colonial expenditure to the cost of one regiment stationed at posts appointed by the Governor, “with a view to moral effect.” After repeated adjournments, Mr. McLean's first proposition was carried by 31 votes against 27, on the 6th August, and at a later date ancillary resolutions were carried. The resolutions finally reported to the House were: 1. That in the very threatening aspect of native affairs, the maintenance of a highly-disciplined and well-organized force has become a matter of imperative necessity. 2. That the presence in the North Island of a small body of Imperial troops would greatly assist the colony in its efforts to form and discipline such a force, and would tend to check the spread of disaffection amongst the native race. 3. That, in conformity with the above, this House is of opinion that Commissioners should be sent to England to treat with the Imperial Government for securing the services for the colony of an Imperial force not exceeding 1000 men, for a period not exceeding five years; and this House engages to make provision, in respect of the cost of such force, upon such terms as may be agreed to by the Commissioners on behalf of the colony. 4. That the Commissioners be instructed to lay before the Imperial Government the grounds upon which the colony feels justified in asking for assistance, and to ascertain to what extent, aid, either in men or otherwise, will be afforded. 5. That the Commissioners be also instructed to confer with the Imperial Government and military authorities as to the description of force, whether Ghoorka Regiments or other body of disciplined men, in addition to the 1000 Imperial troops already authorized, it will be most advantageous for the colony to employ for its defence, it being clearly understood that such force will be subject to the control of the Colonial Government; and that the Commissioners be empowered to conclude arrangements for the organization and employment of such force for a period not exceeding three years, provided that the whole cost of it to the colony does not exceed the sum of £70,000 per annum.

To such prostration had the self-reliant doctrine been reduced, that all the resolutions except the last were accepted without a division. Mr. Stafford moved the rejection of the fifth, and the majority against him was only 32 against 29. Mete Kingi and Tareha, who had supported the other propositions, did not vote

– 543 –

upon the fifth. The Council, when asked to concur with the resolutions, struck out the words, “whether Ghoorka Regiments or other body of disciplined men.” Sir G. Bowen wrote that the introduction of Sikhs or Ghoorkas would have alienated the loyal Maoris. He forwarded a message to Ceylon, whence it was telegraphed to the Secretary of State. It told of the resolutions praying that the 18th Regiment might be detained, and added that an Act had been passed binding the colony to pay the sum demanded by the Imperial Government if the 18th Regiment should be detained. With his explanatory despatch he sent a memorandum, in which Mr. Fox reasoned in a tone very different from that of his book on the war published in 1866. The arrival of Te Kooti at the Maori king's head-quarters vibrated terribly in his breast. “It may truly be said that a general rising of the natives and a special attack on the settled districts of Auckland, is trembling in the balance.” The Ministry thought the removal of the troops would precipitate a conflict. They were grateful to Sir G. Bowen for his previous efforts but asked for more. They could not believe that orders, given months previously at the other side of the globe, would be carried into effect when a large sacrifice of human life was imminent. They could not but believe that General Chute had some discretion in the matter. The Governor was entreated to forward to the General a copy of the piteous memorandum. Sir G. Bowen decided “that it would be improper on his part to obstruct the action of Parliamentary Government by declining to forward” to the General and to the Commodore the appeal of the Assembly. General Chute could not but pity, and pitying, could not but use what power he had to allay Mr. Fox's alarm. He informed the Governor that he had “taken the responsibility of detaining the 18th Regiment in New Zealand pending further instructions from the Imperial Government.” Both Houses, on the 11th August, unanimously passed votes of thanks to the General “for the great promptitude with which he had acted in a critical emergency.” He deserved them. The Maori king also deserved thanks which he did not receive.

Te Kooti made no impression at Tokangamutu. Tawhiao would not admit him to his presence. The marauder affected

– 544 –

to assume authority. At Lake Taupo he had made chiefs surrender to him their green-stone heirlooms. He failed to induce the king's adherents to humour him in the same manner. It was said that Te Paea, Tawhiao's able sister, threatened that if the king's court should countenance Te Kooti she would shake the dust off her feet, and seek a husband among the Pakehas. The outlaw persuaded Rewi to accompany him in excursions, but Ngapora would not listen to him. In August he was so unwelcome a guest that his supplies were stopped. Tawhiao would not permit him to proceed to the west coast. The roads thitherwards were guarded against him, and he was compelled to return by the road by which he came. Tawhiao's armed body-guard was ever on the alert while Te Kooti's visit lasted. Before Te Kooti left the district he went to the house of Mr. Hettit at Otorohanga, where his followers took what they chose. Te Kooti offered as payment a stolen bill of exchange on the Bank of New Zealand. He did not violate the “mana” of the king by violence to Mr. Hettit's person. He took occasion to say that when he returned from the Chatham Islands he intended to interfere with no one, and that Major Biggs was the cause of what he called “the war.” But the court of the Maori king was secluded. The pale (aukati) made it difficult to procure trustworthy information. Rumour was busy. Evil report flitted over events like the will of the wisp over a marsh. Long days elapsed before the colonists knew that Tawhiao had discouraged Te Kooti. A motion by Mr. Tancred on internal defence proposed that settlers should be withdrawn from isolated situations and allowed to select homesteads nearer to protecting force, a moveable corps being held available at every moment. Though withdrawn (27th July) after repeated discussion, the motion shows the condition of the public mind. On the 22nd July, a friend of the Government moved that a Commission, consisting of two Judges of the Native Lands Court, and two other persons not members of the House of Representatives, should be appointed to inquire into the unsatisfactory relations between the European and Maori races. After adjournment, this motion also came to an untimely end. Mr. Stafford, with a majority of 33 to 22, shelved it by moving the previous question on the 27th July, although Mr. Fox and

– 545 –

Mr. Donald McLean were in the minority as well as Mete Kingi Paetahi.

At attempt to deal with constitutional questions seriously occupied the House. Mr. Stevens, a ministerial supporter, strove “in pursuance of the financial resolution” of the previous session to lay down principles that there should be no taxation except what might be required for general charges of the Government, and that Provincial Government should cease to exist,—with sundry other propositions. In Committee another member who had assisted to place Mr. Fox in office carried an amendment that it was inopportune to decide constitutional questions at such a time; that the new Parliament must meet them; and that the grave difficulties of the colony permitted no reduction of taxation. Sir George Grey had commenced, and Sir George Bowen did not cease to recommend, the old Roman policy of making roads as the surest method of subduing the country.¹ The Maoris understood its significance. The Ministry accepted it as essential to the safety of settlements, and proposed a loan to the North Island, guarding against its incidence upon the general revenue of New Zealand by a proviso that the liability of the North Island should be irreversible except by a vote of three-fourths of the House of Representatives. Mr. Vogel thought this precaution necessary “against the reversal, by a North Island majority, of the condition of the loan.” The proposition bore no fruit in 1869. Mr. Vogel spoke strongly in favour of the provincial system. “Can we doubt,” he said, “that the colony owes to the provinces that they have saved for useful purposes some portion of the enormous revenues raised within them?—how powerful for colonizing purposes the provincial organizations have proved!… It is well to think over this history before deciding to do anything to destroy institutions, the past usefulness of which it is impossible to question.”… We will not submit to the House proposals which would organic-

– 546 –

ally change the relations between the colony and the provinces.” Voluminous financial tables accompanied the Treasurer's speech; but he proposed no startling changes. His estimates of ways and means left a small balance in the Treasury such as had been bequeathed by his predecessor. Mr. Fitzherbert had succeeded in converting under the Consolidated Loan Act of 1867 about two millions and three quarters sterling of existing colonial and provincial bonds, and Mr. Vogel stepped into the vantage-ground thus obtained. He declared, however, that as to the reciprocal waiving of claims by the Home and Colonial Governments he was still dissatisfied. “Circumstances give us a wide pecuniary claim on the Imperial Government.” As to the war he took the view of him “who carried the bag.” Righteousness was not in his estimates. “It is the purse which fights upon the Maori's side, and well he knows it. What is the result of the last eight years' prolonged rebellion? A certain loss of life on both sides; some loss of land on one side; an enormous loss of money and property on the other. The land remains to be disposed of, and, as the rebels mistakenly hope, to be won back. But the money is gone—it cannot be recovered. You cannot get money from the Maori, for he has none; you cannot commit him to an enormous debt, for there is no one from whom he could borrow were he even disposed to do so. Every fresh £100,000 he adds to our debt is a fresh triumph gained by him which it is impossible to win back. Are we so blind as to fail to see that the financial ruin of the colony would be victory to the rebels? We ask the House to arrest the steady progress the rebels have hitherto made in fixing on the colony overwhelming burdens. We have land which may be worth a quarter of a million to show against three millions and a half of debt, besides claims for an unknown amount for compensation for destruction of property.” The same truth was forced upon Mr. Vogel and the Maori. The former groaned: “Thou stick'st a dagger in me; I shall never see my money again.” The latter had long before bitterly sighed in a petition to England: “The blood of the Pakeha is shed in his money, but as to the blood of the Maori it is shed on his own land.” Mr. Vogel was responsible for no former war, but he could not speak truly of a prolonged rebellion. Sir George Grey left and Sir George Bowen found New Zealand in peace.

– 547 –

The deeds of Titokowaru and Te Kooti were the consequence of acts of the Government. If Mr. Vogel's speech was reported to the latter he must have smiled grimly at the way in which the iron was entering into the soul of the Pakeha Treasurer. Without regular ammunition, and known to have used the heads of lucifer matches instead of percussion-caps, the wandering savage had been able to put an insufferable load on his well-supplied foes.

Amongst the returns compiled for the financial statement was an interesting summary showing that in eleven years revenues of £6,877,000 had been collected, of which nearly £3,400,000 had been disbursed for colonial purposes, about £1,400,000 for services within and for the provinces, and nearly £2,200,000 had been handed to the provinces for appropriation. Such had been the provincial leanings in Governments that more than £100,000 in excess of their dues swelled the last item.

The labours of the session found expression in 76 Acts. One empowered the New Zealand Commissioners to treat with the Imperial Government for a force to put down rebellion, and to raise another force for colonial service. The Commissioners appointed were Mr. Dillon Bell and Dr. Featherston. Sir George Bowen made their appointment known by telegram from Ceylon, hoping the Imperial Government would decide nothing without hearing the Commissioners. A New Zealand Cross Endowment Act enabled the Governor to grant incomes from certain reserved lands to holders of the New Zealand Cross. The Stafford Ministry had, on the recommendation of Colonel Whitmore, in March, 1869, obtained the assent of the Governor in Council to an order instituting the “decorative distinction of a silver cross.” It had been conferred on four Europeans and one Maori when Sir George Bowen applied for sanction of his Order in Council. Earl Granville answered in October, 1869, that “under the very exceptional circumstances of the colony” he had recommended, and Her Majesty had been pleased to sanction the Order, from its original date, by her direct authority. To avoid creating a precedent the despatch emphatically pronounced that to no Governor was delegated the authority inherent in the Queen as the fountain of honour.

A languid consciousness of the valour of Rangihiwinui had at

– 548 –

this time begun to pervade Earl Granville's mind. On the 22nd June, he informed the Lords of the Treasury that “strong representations had been made by the present and late Governors of New Zealand of the services rendered by a friendly chief of high rank known as Te Kepa or Major Kemp.” A pension and a sword, or a sword and badge the gift of Her Majesty, had been suggested as an appropriate distinction. Earl Granville thought the pension was a matter for the Colonial Government to consider, but approved of the sword, and of the badge. The Lords of the Treasury concurred. Earl Granville announced (14th July) that a sword would be sent, and would “probably be followed by a silver badge.” The secret was not to be mentioned to Rangihiwinui “until the sword arrives.” Other chiefs would be similarly honoured on the Governor's recommendation. Sir George Bowen with the advice of Mr. McLean recommended Ropata Wahawaha, the hero of Ngatapa, and four others. The task which the Earl had now undertaken suited so well his noble mind that he ruminated much upon it. He revised his first impressions, and after several months wrote as follows: “In my despatch of the 14th July, I informed you that the swords would be followed by badges. On consideration, however, it has been determined that the gift of a sword will be a sufficient mark of Her Majesty's favour.” Rangihiwinui's sword, sent in September, was kept back till other swords arrived. On the 20th June, 1870, he, Ropata, and Mokena Kohere, received their swords in presence of Ministers, members of Parliament, and other notables. The Governor made an oration on the exploits of each chief; Rangihiwinui having recently marched across the island from Wanganui to Opotiki. The inscription was—”Given by Queen Victoria to —– for his unfailing loyalty and valour. May you long wear it in health and honour.” Rangihiwinui's speech has been thus translated. “Victoria by the grace of God, long may you live. May your children, Prince Albert, the Duke of Edinburgh, and the princesses live long. I thank Victoria, Queen of the world, for casting her eyes hitherwards upon me, upon this dark-complexioned, this foolish, unhouselled race. I thank the Queen heartily for sending me this proof of her love across the billows of the great sea. Here it lies;—the sickle with which evil is to be cut down. Your ancestors, the kings, and yourself

– 549 –

have been protected by God. You stand on the most sacred place of your ancestors—the kings of great fame of old. And now you have caused the sun to shine over this obscure island. It is very good that the elder and younger brother should live together as they did in the ark. After that, the elder and the younger brother were divided. Now, in this year, for the first time they are again united. I and my tribes are under the authority of the Queen. This was Hori Kingi's last word, to me, to Mete Kingi, and to all his tribe: ‘When I am gone, remain quiet under the authority of the Queen: be loyal to her.’ And to me especially he said: ‘Be strong in putting down evil that peace may be secure.’ Well! now that your pledge of affection lies before me, I trust that peace will always be with you, O Queen Victoria, and with your children. May peace be with the Government of New Zealand. Let love be in your hearts. Do not keep all the good word to yourselves—let us share it.” Mokena Kohere said: “The first proof of the Queen's affection for us was in sending missionaries; the second was the law; and the third is this. I thank you, Queen Victoria, —I greet you.” Ropata Wahawaha said: “I have nothing to add to the words of Rangihiwinui and Kohere. I thank you heartily, O Queen Victoria; and you, O Governor Bowen.”

Some of the chiefs who frequented society at Wellington were so ignorant of European manners that they were known to seize food in their hands. They had nevertheless a nobility of mind which they may be allowed to show in their own words, and they could trace their unquestioned rank through many generations. Recorded on the genealogical tree, twenty generations testified to the rank of Rangihiwinui's ancestor in the days when the Maoris first sailed to New Zealand. All who had seen him in the field admired his strategy and courage. The Duke of Edinburgh remarked his noble bearing in society. Sir George Bowen wrote: “He is not darker than many Spaniards, and if he were in a London drawing-room people would say of him, ‘Who is that distinguished foreigner?’ His manners, like those of most of the great hereditary chiefs, are excellent.” To him, he declared, was due more than to any man or men the obtaining of peace for New Zealand. On his visit to Wellington when he received the sword from the Queen, he with Ropata Wahawaha,

– 550 –

Mokena Kohere, and eleven other chiefs, was entertained at the Governor's house. The last of the English troops had then been removed from New Zealand, and men's minds were dark with apprehension of what might come upon the land if the Maoris should combine against the Pakeha. There were intrigues among men in power to transfer the allegiance of the colony to the United States of America. Rangihiwinui told the assembled company: “I and the other chiefs would feel it unworthy of us to take advantage of the weakness of the English through the removal of the troops. We will never do that. Kahore, Kahore, Kahore” (No, no, no). He waved his hand as he spoke, and appealed to his brother chiefs, who responded, in deep-toned chorus, “Kahore,” to the deep and powerful voice of the speaker.

Turning from this digression to the session of 1869, it deserves to be mentioned that not only in the press but in Parliament there were murmurs about casting off allegiance to the Queen and seeking the aid of the United States in crushing the Maoris. Sir G. Bowen wrote to the late Chief Justice, Sir W. Martin: “If what has been called the last prayer of New Zealand is rejected (the prayer for retention of troops at the cost of the colony), I fear the colonists will transfer their allegiance to the United States.” In the Acts of the Assembly in 1869, there is little which demands notice. The Military Contribution Act was short and unambiguous. In the event of detention of the 18th Regiment it applied from the Consolidated Revenue such sum as any of Her Majesty's Secretaries of State might certify to be required towards the support of the regiment. It was rapidly passed through both Houses while the attitude of the Maori king was an object of anxiety. A few days afterwards a Disturbed Districts Bill was passed by the Representatives. It was worthy of introduction by Fox, one of the promoters of the Coercive Acts of 1863. It provided for summary trial by courts-martial composed of officers of the colonial forces, and for superseding the ordinary tribunals. In the Council, on the motion of Mr. Mantell, it was referred to a Select Committee, which took evidence from Judge Johnston, of the Supreme Court. In the midst of general panic it is consoling to find the dispenser of justice unshaken. He thought it unwise to abandon the time-honoured principles of trial by established Courts. He

– 551 –

suggested alterations. He quoted against the introduction of “the so-called drum-head court-martial” the weighty words of Chief Justice Cockburn (in Regina v. Nelson and Brand): “It is said that as the necessity of repressing rebellion is what justifies the exercise of martial law, and as to this end the example of immediate punishment is essential, the exhibition of martial law in its most summary and terrible form is indispensable. If by this it is meant that examples are to be made without taking the necessary means to discriminate between guilt and innocence; and that, in order to inspire terror, men are to be sacrificed whose guilt remains uncertain, I can only say I hope that no Court of Justice will ever entertain so fearful and odious a doctrine. There are considerations more important even than the shortening the temporary duration of an insurrection. Among them are the eternal and immutable principles of justice; principles which can never be violated without lasting detriment to the true interests and well-being of a civilized community.”

The Council amended the Bill. The Lower House agreed to the amendments, and the Governor gave the Royal Assent. The Act was to be in force to the end of the next ensuing session of the Assembly and no longer. Earl Granville did not recommend its disallowance, but pointed out clauses which were too stringent, —”in case it should be proposed to re-enact the law.”

In a luminous charge to the grand jury at Wellington, Judge Johnston (1st September, 1869) explained the purport of the law, the crimes it was intended to restrain, and the duties of the grand jury. The wild demands of the market-place, echoed in the printing-shop, and reverberated by the Representative House, were abashed by the voice of justice. To the grand jury the Judge expounded the general law of high treason, the New Zealand treason felony law of 1868, the recent enactment, and the incumbent duty of the jury to be reasonably satisfied that the persons brought before them aimed by force to coerce the Government, to change the law, or to subvert the sovereignty of the Queen, before they could find indictments for treason felony. As it stood, the Disturbed Districts Act might content the most exacting enemy of the Maori. Any officer of the forces might arrest on suspicion, and a person arrested might, on failing to satisfy a resident magistrate,

– 552 –

or any two justices of the peace that he had been of good behaviour for twelve months, be imprisoned with or without hard labour for eighteen months. How difficult it might be for a Maori to prove his past good behaviour to those who arrested him on suspicion can be imagined. Yet this was the law after the Council had pruned the Bill. Amongst the Acts of the session was one which made it capital felony to sell arms to, or for the use of, rebels.¹ A question of privilege arose early in the session. On an amendment about war expenditure, lost (15th July) by 31 votes against 37, Major Brown, of the Taranaki militia, voted in the minority against Mr. Fox. Mr. Fox resented Major Brown's conduct. A Select Committee inquired whether Mr. Fox's letter was a breach of privilege, and in the House a bare majority (29 to 27) resolved that it was not. Major Brown was in the minority; as was Mr. Stafford, whose conduct towards Mr. Crawford was like that which he condemned in Fox. The condition of the Thames gold-field was seriously considered. In 1852 the Government first made agreements under which gold was searched for on Maori land, and in subsequent years McLean and others made bargains with chiefs and averted trouble. Proclamations defined the area within which mining might be carried on. On the 6th July, Fox and Vogel introduced a Bill “to remove doubts as to the validity of certain proclamations relating to a certain district known as the Thames gold-fields, and for other purposes.” It was pointed out that the Bill would injure the Maori owners, and make valid regulations which were contrary to “agreements” entered into with the chiefs. It would enable the Government, maugre any agreement previously made, to prevent the natives from selling land within the area of a proclaimed gold-field. Thirteen native owners feared that a proclamation by the Superintendent at Auckland would cause them to receive less money under a leasing system than had accrued to them under the miner's right payments. The Committee on Public Petitions failed to see that the petitioners' fears were well grounded. They submitted figures to prove that in certain contingencies the gains of the chief would be increased by the new regulations. They

– 553 –

thought that if the substance of their report were “honestly and fairly explained to the petitioners their apprehensions might be removed.” It was duly translated into the Maori language. Mr. Robert Graham petitioned for protection of his rights acquired from the natives. The Committee left him to any legal remedy available. The Bill was read a second time on the 13th July; committed, and recommitted on the 14th, and on Mr. Vogel's assurance that it was of an urgent nature was passed through all its stages on the same day. But the Council declined to pass with equal rapidity a measure which might be fraught with evil. Seventeen chiefs petitioned that their interests might be protected in accordance with agreements entered into with the Governor. Mr. Robert Graham asked to be heard at the bar of the Council against the Bill. On the 21st July counsel for and against the Bill were heard. Numerous amendments were made in the Bill. Its title was altered. It was made a Bill to remove doubts as to the validity of certain proclamations and agreements,¹ &c., and the House of Representatives accepted the amendments. It was a time when the Colonial Government could ill afford to furnish fresh cause of quarrel. One of the points of the Maori king's message to the northern chiefs by Rapihana, communicated by that chief to Sir G. Bowen, related to “digging for gold.” Te Kooti was at the court of the Maori king; there were many Hau Haus in the Thames district; and no one could tell to what height the flame of rebellion might rise if fed by a fresh act of injustice. There was a Bill to amend the Native Lands Act before the Houses, which involved the same point. Among five new members called to the Council in the beginning of the session was Francis Dart Fenton, Chief Judge of the Native Land Court. He introduced a Bill to amend the Native Lands Act, and the Council passed it without amendment. Referred to a Select Committee in the Lower House, it was closely examined. Mr. Fenton was heard as a witness; and descanted on the delicate nature of his office. “As Chief Judge of the Court I have not only to decide principles of law on equitable grounds; if you can understand the expression, I am greatly concerned with the political state of the country, and I cannot separate the two

– 554 –

functions. Although deciding legal questions, I am in many cases deciding peace and war. The first thing necessary is to keep faith with the natives, and to do justice towards them; and also to prevent them from breaking faith.” Alterations were made and conference ensued between the Houses, but the Bill became law. Mr. Fenton was not so fortunate with regard to the Native Reserves Bill adopted by the Council. By 21 votes against 16 it was resolved not to allow it to go into Committee in the Lower House. The episode of these Bills is useful in bringing before the eye of the student the condition of the country at the time. Terror in the street and farm; a savage fury in the press, only exceeded by the atrocities of the Hau Haus; piteous cries from Ministers to the General, and to England; diplomatic suggestions from the Governor about the forces of the Maori king—all these things tell their tale significantly. But the spirit of the Judicial Bench, as witnessed by Judge Johnston and Mr. Fenton, declares that still there was, happily, in the community a sea-mark high above the turbid foam, a beacon to the eyes of all who clung to the eternal principles of justice.

The daily needs of a colony found expression in those numerous Acts which come and go like colours on leaves in autumn. The spectacle of a noble but savage family battling for its native soil gives absorbing interest to the 50 years which followed the preaching of the Gospel by Marsden on the shore of the Bay of Islands. To rescue the deeds of the Mauri from oblivion, and present them in their true light, is the duty of the historian. War, which has been called the staple of the story of most countries, was specially so in New Zealand, whose chiefs did not shrink from battling with superior numbers. Nevertheless, the political condition of the colony must be scanned. The Council was still careful about its standing. On the motion of Mr. Menzies, who had been a member since the year 1858, a Committee was appointed “to inquire into certain privileges” of the Council. The Committee examined: 1st. The powers held by the New Zealand Council. 2nd. The powers held by law, rule or usage, by the Houses of Lords and Commons. 3rd. Legislative powers in British colonies, and in the United States of America. They reported their labours without making any other recommendation than that a similar Committee

– 555 –

should be reappointed in the following session. Their quotations from Judge Story's ‘Commentaries on the United States Constitution’ implied that the Committee were not friendly to the extreme claims put forward by some writers.¹ They remarked that the assumption of power to tack measures to a Money Bill was “an unconstitutional encroachment,” and that, to stay it, the Lords, to give permanent effect to their own rights, made it a Standing Order to reject upon sight all Bills that are tacked to Money Bills, and thus guarded against the abuse of power by the Commons.

It may seem strange that up to this date there had been no step taken to place Maoris in the Council. No Ministers had advised the Governor to give that voice in the Council which the Maori Representation Act had given in the House of Representatives. Before the prorogation of the Assembly, a protest made in London against a despatch from Earl Granville (21st March, 1869) was published in the colony. Forgetful that he, as President of the Council in 1859 and 1860, was jointly responsible with the Duke of Newcastle for unjustly plunging into the Waitara war, the Earl in writing about Mr. Fitzherbert's mission in terms which seemed rude from a polished pen, threw the whole brunt of responsibility upon the colonists. To gratify their desires, to satisfy the Assembly and his advisers, Governor Browne had taken a step “blamed by some as inconsistent with those duties to the natives which were in some sense Imperial,” although the Queen was bound by treaty to respect the territorial rights of the natives. The result was war in the interests of the colonists (but principally carried on at Imperial cost), and confiscation of lands which could not otherwise be obtained unless by friendly arrangement. The Earl denied that the Imperial Government had transferred any “obligation to the colony whatever, except that imposed on all of us by natural justice, not to appropriate the property of others,” and asserted that the mother-country had paid a high price for the territories

– 556 –

recently and unwisely appropriated. The publication of the despatch in England induced Sir George Grey (the late Governor), Sir Charles Clifford the late Speaker, Mr. Sewell, Mr. Atkinson, and Mr. Campbell, to protest publicly against it as “fraught with danger to the colony.” It would be interpreted to natives concurrently with the removal of troops; it would be inferred that the Queen was displeased with the colonists, and that massacres of women, children, and missionaries were sanctioned by Imperial authority as mere acts of reprisal. They declared with sorrow that the policy pursued towards the colony was calculated to alienate the affections of loyal subjects, and “to drive the colony out of the empire.” At the close of the session Sir George Bowen informed Earl Granville of the comments made upon the protest in the colony. He sent “one of the most moderate,”— a leading article, which called the Earl's despatch “studied misrepresentations”… a fitting climax “to a long course of mal-administration,” and only intelligible if the policy of the Imperial Government was to reduce the empire and drive away the colonies. The tone was declared to be even more offensive than the matter, and suggested the idea that the writer was not unwilling to irritate the colonists. If revolutionary rancour should be excited against England, “the historian would have no difficulty in tracing its rise and progress.” More measured comments appeared in Australian newspapers; but if those which were sent to the Earl from New Zealand were “the most moderate,” he might flatter himself on success, if his object had indeed been to irritate. Sir G. Bowen deplored the protest and its consequences, but confessed that it reflected not unfaithfully the general feeling in New Zealand—feeling which would probably be universal, if “the last prayer of the colony” for garrisons of the line should be refused, after legislative guarantee had been given for their cost. With “pain and sorrow” he added that a portion of the New Zealand press had already advocated annexation of the islands to the United States of America, in the hope that the coercion of the Indians of the west of the Mississippi would be imitated by the Washington Cabinet in New Zealand. Earl Granville, finding that his reasonings won no friends, replied that the views of the Government were arrived at after the most serious consideration, “under a grave

– 557 –

sense of responsibility of what were the true interests of the colony as well as of this country.” He was at the time solving the knotty point—whether a badge as well as a sword should be given to loyal chiefs,—and a few days afterwards wrote a separate despatch about it.

After the close of the session the Governor made a provincial tour. At Taranaki, the Ngatiruanui chief, Hone Pihama, met him with words of peace. He had availed himself of events which he could not prevent, and had entered into a contract to carry the mail-letters through the country of Titokowaru, who did not molest the carriers. A band of Ngatiporou allies, from the east coast, located at Waihi, were in ill-humour about the lands to be assigned to them. Sir G. Bowen, at Mr. Fox's request, made promises which were deemed sufficient, and they marched forthwith to secure their new home. He rapturously described the kilted warriors, striding proudly forward with mantles waving in the breeze, their arms flashing in the sun, mounted chiefs galloping to and fro, marshalling their clansmen by voice and gesture, and guiding the waggons which bore the sick and wounded. “As I rode up to each group I was saluted by all alike with ringing shouts and chants of welcome. This fertile country is bounded on the south by the Pacific, as blue and sparkling as the Mediterranean; on the north by the dark forests which reach inland from Wanganui to Taranaki, and above which swells the graceful cone-like peak of Mount Egmont, the holy mountain of the Maoris, celebrated in their traditional songs and legends. Mount Egmont, a now extinct volcano, is a more shapely and graceful Mount Etna.” Mr. McLean accompanied the Governor in his tour, and was evidently acceptable to the Maoris. In October, the vice-regal party was at Kaipara on the north-west coast, and was warmly welcomed. The careful examination of the Rangitikei-Manawatu land dispute by the Court in 1869 was thought to have had good effect in reconciling the Maoris to the law. The execution in November, 1869, of a prisoner, proved to have joined Te Kooti after the latter returned from the Chatham Islands, on “evidence which would have justified his conviction for participation in several murders,” was at the same time a warning to those who might be disposed to join that robber. One prisoner strangled himself

– 558 –

in gaol, and three of Te Kooti's companions were sentenced to penal servitude for life. One of them, Matene te Karo, averred that he had fought for the Government as well as for Te Kooti, and the Attorney-General admitted the truth of the averment. Seventy-three of Titokowaru's followers were sentenced to terms of penal servitude ranging downwards from seven years. After his flight Titokowaru was quiet, but Te Kooti was stirring. When leaving the Maori king's territories he was accompanied by Rewi, and the informants of the Government thought Rewi insane. Subsequently it was surmised that Rewi abandoned Te Kooti when the latter was foiled in battle. When Te Kooti reached Lake Taupo he entered upon a career of defeat, escape, march and countermarch, sudden attacks upon overwhelming numbers, and retreats so rapid that men were aghast at his disappearance they knew not whither. It is a tale which none but a Hau Hau chronicler could tell, except as to his conflicts with the local forces. His first repulse was at the hands of a Maori chief, Henare Tomoana, who was persuaded by Mr. Ormond, Superintendent at Hawke's Bay, to lead an expedition from Napier. Henare Tomoana was about to start, when one Sutton served him with a writ for a debt, for stores, to the amount of £900. Mr. Ormond, who was Government Agent in the province as well as Superintendent, sent a message to Sutton: “I explained (he swore, 1873) that it was for the public benefit that Henare was going out, and asked him to wait till his return. Sutton said, ‘He is going into action, he may be shot to-morrow, and what is to become of my money?’” But Mr. Ormond's interference prevailed. He swore (1873) Henare gave “the writ as a reason why he could not go.