– 1 –

Chapter XVII.
1872–1874.
Mclean and The Maoris.

Donald Mclean, meanwhile, was tempering to the chiefs the loss of their lands by urging them to cultivate flax. A few sentences will show how the Gael accommodated his phrase to the Maori. “Pleiades is high in the heavens, the warm season has arrived, and the thoughtful man considers it time to grow food to enable him to live, and to extend hospitality to strangers, lest he be as the thoughtless one who, when seasons of scarcity arrive, is in a very help less condition. In former days all kinds of food used by the Maoris—kumara, taro, and other things were largely cultivated; at present their cultivation has decreased. I therefore think that you should again be attentive lest they disappear utterly; and that the word of the proverb ought to be fulfilled, which says, ‘The fame of a man brave in war is uncertain, but the fame of a man diligent or brave in tilling the ground will always last.”’ He offered prizes for production of flax. “I know that you, the Maoris, are ignorant of the prices, &c., in England; therefore, I think that if you will again turn your attention to these industries you will obtain the benefit of prosperity.” The Maoris could not but reflect that former governments had destroyed their plantations and burned their dwellings.

– 2 –

The burly Scotchman was not easily stirred from his policy of peace. A surveyor, Mr. Todd, was shot near Pirongia, in Waikato, by a Hau Hau, who took refuge at once in the king's territory. McLean determined to treat the outrage as agrarian rather than political. It was anomalous that no writ could run within Tawhiao's territory; but a broken pledge to him might entail many more murders. The king's pale recognized by the government could not be infringed. If the Hau Hau who committed the murder had hoped to embroil the races afresh he was disappointed. Even when a chief on the Thames River barred the electric telegraph, and stopped the conveyance of the mail between Auckland and Tauranga, McLean pursued his policy. It was condemned as dilatory by some fiery spirits. In March, 1871, 167 residents in Waikato petitioned the Governor. They asked him to establish a rival pale to that of the Maori king, under penalty of death to any Maori who might cross it. By this bold and firm policy, they said, peace would be secured. McLean was not to be diverted into a path which led to blood.

Sir G. Bowen visited the Middle Island early in 1871. When he returned to Auckland he was confronted by the eld difficulty of retaining Imperial sympathy without a symbol of Imperial strength. H.M.S. “Virago” was ordered to England in March, and until the “Rosario” could arrive in New Zealand in May no man-of-war could be placed there by Commodore Stirling, who was in H.M.S. “Clio” at Sydney. Instantly the New Zealand ministry declared that it was “very perilous” to withdraw the “Virago.” Mr. Fox telegraphed to the Governor that “the removal of the land forces, and the manner in which it was done, and Lord Granville's celebrated despatch, tried the loyalty of the colony very severely, and I consider it my duty to state, in the plainest possible manner, that should the colony arrive at the conclusion that the Imperial government intends to withdraw the countenance afforded by the presence of a naval force, small as it already is, it will be very difficult for many of the best affected to retain those feelings of attachment to the parent country which have hitherto been so strongly felt and warmly expressed.” Whether Fox ineluded

– 3 –

himself amongst “the best affected,” after the “coasting welcome with which he had unclasped the tables of his thoughts” to a foreign consul, it might be hard to tell. But it was clear that many of Fox's supporters would be the “spoils of opportunity.” On the day on which Sir G. Bowen received Fox's telegram, he telegraphed to the commander of the “Virago”: “I request you to postpone the departure. I take the responsibility on myself. I will write to the commodore.” McLean separately urged the necessity of retaining a ship of war. “An imaginative and acute race like the Maori was,” he said, “quick in seizing upon any points of apparent neglect towards New Zealand on the part of the Imperial government.” The commander of the “Virago” agreed to wait till the arrival of another vessel, and copies of the correspondence were sent to England. The Earl of Kimberley told the Governor that, under the circumstances, the detention of the “Virago” was justified, but he regretted the tone of Mr. Fox's telegram, which that gentleman would on reflection see was ill-calculated to improve and strengthen the friendly relations which it was the earnest desire of Her Majesty's government to maintain. The Earl had shown readiness to retain ships of war in New Zealand, and was able to refer to correspondence in rebuking Fox's intemperance. It is fair to add that Mr. Fox regretted his expressions, and assured the Earl that nothing could be further from his intentions than to disturb the friendly relations between the Imperial and Colonial governments.

A singular turn of fortune about this time brought Mr. Fox into antagonism with his old opponent, Mr. Weld, who became Governor of Western Australia in 1869; the only colony in the Southern seas to which English prisoners had recently been transported, and which had then ceased to receive them.

Both Maoris and colonists had protested against Earl Grey's proposition to send convicts to New Zealand, and they had never been sent thither, although, amongst the troops of gold-seekers, quondam convicts had found their way. When, in order to rid itself of some refuse of the convict system in Tasmania, the government granted pardons enabling criminals, who had not undergone the

– 4 –

whole term of their sentences, to migrate to other colonies, South Australia, Victoria, and New Zealand at various times passed Acts to keep out convicts. The New Zealand Act was passed in 1867. To the horror of Mr. Fox, eight convicts holding conditional pardons (i.e. pardons with a condition prohibiting a return to England) arrived at Port Lyttelton in 1871. Four of them were Fenians, and the New Zealand government had already been troubled at the goldfields by Fenian disturbers. Mr. Fox and many others were indignant with Mr. Weld for subjecting New Zealand to the pests thus cast upon her. There was commotion amongst ministers and in despatches. Four ordinary holders of conditional pardons were sentenced in the resident magistrate's court to be deported to the colony from whence they came. The Fenians were released on bail, on their undertaking to leave New Zealand. Mr. Gisborne, the Colonial Secretary, in an angry letter demanded from Western Australia the cost (£150) of sending back the four convicts, but it was discovered that no New Zealand law gave power to hold in custody the arrested convicts when the vessels containing them should reach waters outside the jurisdiction of the colony, and a claim could hardly be urged for payment by one colony to another for the doing of an illegal act. The convicts undertook to depart to New South Wales. Mr. Fox's remonstrance was transmitted to the Secretary of State, and Lord Kimberley assuaged the wrath of Fox and his friends by directing that the holders of conditional pardons should be barred in future from resorting to any Australian colony, and that a breach of the condition should entail forfeiture of the pardon.

The amicable relations which Lord Kimberley established fired the soul of the special envoy, Mr. Vogel. He scorned the lower rung of the ladder of promotion. Presuming on his position as a loan negotiator, accredited to the commercial capital of the world, he aspired to be made a knight, without passing through preliminary gradations. Even his New Zealand associates declared that to grant the request of so recent an interloper in New Zealand affairs would arouse mdignation. Eventually, but by steps, the New Zealand envoy obtained the coveted honour. It is fair to mention

– 5 –

that he had never joined in disaffected movements, and had advocated a large view of the advantages which Imperial connection might confer upon colonies, and on this ground his private claims were urged upon the Colonial Office. It was true that his view was not a high one. He valued the connection with the mother-country because the colony might borrow money more easily there than elsewhere. But the Manchester school was in high repute in England, and its principles were not very different from his. His success in carrying his financial schemes in the New Zealand Assembly commended him to moneyed men in England. His reception by moneyed men in England impressed colonists with his importance. His colleagues put off the meeting of their Parliament in order that he might be present to expound his views.

When the relative strength of armed men under the hunted Te Kooti and the quiescent Titokowaru as compared with the Europeans and allied Maoris is considered, it might seem difficult to imagine that the helpless condition of the colonists had driven such men as Mr. Fox to countenance, and others to advocate, that separation from England which all men deemed it Earl Granville's desire to permit if not to procure. After Te Kooti had been brought to bay at Mahaetari—his prisoners being recaptured, his forces annihilated, and his “mana” swept away—he merely slunk from hole to hole to escape seizure by Ropata. Titokowaru was absolutely at peace, and it was not deemed necessary to take any measures against him. Yet when Mr. Fox emitted a spark of disaffection on the proposed removal of H.M.S. “Virago,” there were enrolled in New Zealand 4263 militia, 6568 volunteers, 723 armed constabulary, 4000 armed Maoris; total, 15,554. Of this large force less than 3000 (volunteers) were enrolled in the Middle Island. Nothing but the suddenness of Te Kooti's raids can explain the terror which his name inspired, and the loud wail with which, in speeches, despatches, and letters, the hard fate of the colonists was sighed to the Colonial Office. In addition to the Maoris formally enrolled there were others eager for the fray. Old Waka Nene, full of years, erect in stature, but undimmed in mind, passed away in the faith of the Christian, with his last

– 6 –

words enjoining peace between the English and his tribe. Borne to his grave by some of the principal colonists, the pall bearers being his brother chiefs and colonial officials, the funeral obsequies were, by his own desire, conducted according to the liturgy of the Church of England. His death was deemed worthy of special notice in the Governor's speech to the Parliament, and both Houses concurred in lamenting the death of the great chief, whom the Council termed the unswerving friend of the colonists and the constant supporter of the authority of the Queen. His children had preceded him, and the silver goblet which the Queen had sent to him he bequeathed as an heirloom in the family of a niece married to an Englishman. In the churchyard of Kororarika¹ the traveller may still see the following public memorial:—

Waka Nene's character, as described in these pages, is confirmed by the epitaph prepared by the government.

The hereditary lust for battle was not extinct in his tribe, and when the old man was removed, some fiery spirits desired to display their prowess. They demanded

– 7 –

from the counsellors of King Tawhiao the surrender of the murderers of Mr. Todd, and they would have made refusal a ground for war. But McLean would not yield to such demands. His policy was accepted by all. The Assembly raised no questions about it. Those who had thirsted for revenge against Titokowaru and Te Kooti sullenly consented to leave things alone, trusting to the decimation by disease and death, which the rifle and civilization had ensured.

Two meetings were held by the Maoris—one at Parihaka on the west coast, where Te Whiti was rising into repute as a prophet; the other at the Maori king's residence, Te Kuiti. To both of them colonists and their Maori friends were invited, and Te Wheoro was treated with marked respect at Te Kuiti, where the Maori king no longer kept aloof, but mingled freely with his guests, as had been the custom before the rape of the Waitara in 1860.

When the Assembly met (Aug., 1871), Mr. Fox made more pronounced his past antagonism to Sir David Monro, who retired from the Speakership, himself proposing his successor, Mr. Dillon Bell. Sir D. Monro had been Speaker from 1861 to 1866, and again from 1866 until, at at the close of the session in 1870, he announced his intended retirement. He expected that Mr. Fox would then “invite the House to take the steps which are dictated by custom and courtesy,” but averred that he “was allowed to leave without a single word of thanks or any acknowledgment” of his services. Fox retorted that it was not usual for a ministry to recommend that their active opponents should be offered seats in the Legislative Council, and he did not doubt that Sir David Monro was opposed to the government policy. Sir David, irritated at the discourtesy shown, was elected to the House of Representatives, and proposed the new Speaker before he was himself unseated on petition. Then the representatives, feeling compunction for their late presiding genius, adopted an address to the Queen, on the motion of Mr. Fox, seconded by Mr. Stafford, praying that some mark of favour might be shown to Sir David Monro, and Sir G. Bowen was requested to intimate that the intention of the House would be met if a seat in the Legislative Council

– 8 –

should be offered to Monro. Though Fox moved the address to comply with public courtesies, he thwarted its immediate fulfilment. An official memorandum by the Colonial Secretary, Mr. Gisborne, declared that though the government had moved the address, “they would not on any account recommend that Sir David Monro should be placed in the Council during the then session.”²

A dispute between the Houses threatened to arrest public business. Mr. Vogel carried through the Lower House, though not without opposition, a Payments to Provinces Bill, modifying certain provisions in the cognate Act of the previous year. The Council demurred to a clause which tended, under colour of repayment to the provinces of former outlay on public works, to endow provincial treasuries with additional funds. To divert to a new use a sum authorized under a Loan Act for specific purposes was a violation of the spirit of the Loan Act. The Council expunged the clause. The Representatives impugned the right of the Council to interfere with clauses relating to appropriation of money. The Council claimed a right to exercise its own judgment whether the clause violated the faith pledged by the Parliament. Each House gave reasons for insisting on its position. Conferences were held. Mr. Sewell, who had recently retired from the Fox ministry, held a seat in the Council, and with Major Richmond and Mr. Seymour was appointed to prepare the reasons of the Council. Mr. Fox, Mr. Vogel, and Mr. Stafford performed a like office for the Assembly. Towards the close of the dispute Mr. Sewell openly voted with the majority in the Council, while his late colleagues in the Lower House were active on the other side. It was easy to get rid of a colleague, even if he should be unwilling to go, but it was impossible to pass a measure against which there was a majority in the Council. Finally, the Council resolved that while insisting on its constitutional right to make the disputed amendments, it would abstain from exercising that right if the other House would engage:—1. To amend the Bill by restricting its operation to the financial year. 2. To refer the point in dispute to the law officers of the

– 9 –

Crown in England, upon a case to be prepared by managers appointed by each House. Subject to these conditions, the Council would, on being made acquainted with the names of the managers appointed by the representatives, cease to insist upon its amendments. These terms were agreed to; the limitation clause was passed, and the case was transmitted to England. The law officers, Sir J. D. Coleridge and Sir G. Jessel, were categorically asked—Whether the Council was constitutionally justified in striking out the disputed clause, and whether the claims put forward by the Representatives were well founded, or what were the proper limitations of them? It was contended on the part of the Council that a Privileges Act of 1865, which gave equal privileges to members of each House, had conferred on the Council a power to deal with money bills in detail. It was retorted that if such a power had been acquired it ought to be taken away. The law officers in England held that the Council was not constitutionally justified in its amendments, and that the claims of the Representatives were well founded,³ … “subject of course to the limitation that the Legislative Council have a perfect right to reject any bill passed by the House of Representatives having for its object to vary the management or appropriation of money prescribed by an Act of the previous session.” As in 1870 so in 1871 there were many conferences on bills. In most cases it may be inferred from the yielding of the Representatives that they had been in the wrong; for men are loth to admit their error even when they see it. A difference on an amending Immigration and Public Works Bill was only solved after a free conference the day before the close of the session. In that case the Representatives adopted the advice of the conference. Certain amendments were made in the manner recommended by the Council, and the Lower House abandoned its disagreement on all questions not specially dealt with by the conference.

Mr. Sewell did not shrink from displaying his contempt for the Treasurer, and broke off his connection with the ministry before the session closed. A proposition to replace in the provincial treasuries funds already dedicated to

– 10 –

railway purposes by the provinces, and to charge the cost of the railways to the general government, was one which he refused to propose to the Legislative Council. He would rather resign office. Fox could not dispense with Vogel's services, and Sewell resigned. Mr. Waterhouse (without a portfolio) undertook to represent the government in the Council. He resigned his position at the end of the session. Hard words were uttered in both Houses. Stafford could not control his anger against Vogel, whose help he had himself used in the expulsion of the Weld ministry, but to whom he had not given office, and who had crept into place under the wings of Fox and McLean when Stafford was expelled. Mr. Vogel's mission to England formed the staple of much discussion. He associated himself with Mr. Julyan (one of the Crown agents for the colonies) in negotiating the loan on the Stock Exchange at 5 per cent., and raised £1,200,000 at a rate of £95 16s. 9d. Contractors were found who undertook the construction of railways to an extent of £4,000,000. The contractors were guaranteed interest for their outlay, and the government was to have power to purchase the lines when made. Two forms of agreement were signed in England to enable the colonial government to exercise an option. Under one of them it was proposed to give the contractors three-quarters of an acre of land for every pound sterling expended by them in constructing railways and providing plant.

Though not present at the opening of the Assembly on the 14th Aug., Mr. Vogel made a financial statement in it on the 12th Sept. The revenue had fallen off. The invitation to the provinces to co-operate with the government in promoting immigration having produced no fruit, the government proposed to deprive the provinces of all control in the matter, and their policy was not repelled by the House. New Zealand seemed to have put her affairs into the hands of an agent, who, having contracted her debts, was to be allowed time to show whither they would lead her. Attempts were made to abolish the gold export duty, i.e., the trifling royalty collected at the Custom House on the treasures taken from the earth by every comer and goer. By large majorities the proposition was rejected on two occasions.

– 11 –

The revenue was supplemented in 1871 by increased Customs and Stamp duties. Contractors were on the way to the colony to carry out the works for which loans had been raised, and when the session was concluded additions were made to the ministry. Mr. J. D. Ormond became Minister for Public Works, and was to reside in the Northern Island; Mr. Reeves became Resident Minister for the Middle Island. Mr. Vogel was looked upon as a kind of dictator, and to avoid inconvenient responsibility he generally travelled during vacations to England or to the neighbouring colonies, but always upon an errand which imposed upon New Zealand the cost of the journey.

A terrible shock, felt poignantly throughout the southern hemisphere, caused fervent addresses to the Queen. John Coleridge Patteson, Bishop of Melanesia, who ever modestly declared that he sat at the feet of Bishop Selwyn, the founder of his bishopric, was one of those rare mortals who seemed vouchsafed to the world to show that humanity, not altogether vainly, may strive to follow the precepts of the Divine Master. Able, but veiling all consciousness of talent under the simplicity of earnestness; yearning after his dark pupils as veritably and indeed carven in the image of God, and calling in their weakness for help from their more fortunate brothers; gentle, yet bold; considerate of others’ fears and prejudices, yet daringly committing himself to the surf and landing defenceless, save by his heroic bearing, amongst the wondering armed islanders who were accustomed to see the scoundrels of the Pacific loaded with weapons which they mercilessly abused—the young Bishop had won the affection and admiration of all who had seen or heard of him. He falsified the adage that no man can be a hero in the eyes of his valet; and proved in so doing how much higher is the type of the Christian than that of the man of the world.

There had sprung up an abomination under the name of labour traffic among the islands of the Pacific. The natives were nominally hired. In most cases it was ascertained that the terms of the so-called hiring were not understood by the hired. Three months was their idea when three years were in the bond. But fraudulent or deceptive contracts were not the only weapons resorted to. By artifice

– 12 –

or force natives were kidnapped when they were unwilling to go with the robbers of men. When crowds of islanders gathered round a vessel heavy weights were dropped upon canoes to crush them, and the natives on rising to the surface were picked up, or sometimes shot in brutal sport if they seemed able to swim to the distant shore. On the sea, terror was the rule—murder the means to enforce it. Seventy lives were sacrificed by indiscriminate firing into the densely-crowded hold of a vessel in which the islanders were packed. The dead, and even the wounded, were cast into the sea when the white savages proceeded to put their vessel in order. One rascal simulated the appearance of the bishop by walking on the deck clad in bishop's garb. The islanders thus inveigled were seized, and their countrymen were enraged. At Nukapu, an island of the Swallow group, near Santa Cruz, the bishop and two companions, one of them a native missionary, were slain in revenge—and never perhaps was there more willing martyrdom. He had earnestly besought the government to restrain the traffic whose atrocities incarnadined the seas. He knew, and others dreaded, that in consequence of it, wherever he went, his life was in his hand. Both Houses in New Zealand declared that there was reason to believe that his death was owing to an infamous traffic, which was a reproach and scandal to the British name. Both Houses implored the Queen to take some steps to redress the wrongs of the islanders, and redeem the character of her subjects.

The addresses were graciously received, and a bill was laid before Parliament to check the horrors which, under a smooth name, and sometimes under the flag of England, vied with the black deeds of the slave-trade. The Admiralty was set in motion, and Commodore Stirling was instructed to be vigorous in repressing “the abominable traffic” which had grown up. A vessel of war was requisite at New Zealand, and another at Cape York; but the other four vessels under the Commodore might be employed in the Pacific, and he was empowered to build some small craft to aid them. The cry of outraged humanity had reached the throne. The law enacted was useful, but the one thing needful, though pressed upon the official mind, was not

– 13 –

accorded. If every vessel proved to contain a South Sea Islander, placed there without his or her consent, had been by that fact confiscate, the labour of the Commodore would have been light, and the traffic in mankind would have been stayed. It was urged upon the Colonial Office that there could be no nobler task than to obtain the aid of the United States, of France, and of other nations in crushing the nefarious trade in which rascals of all countries were engaged. Mutual permission of search in the Pacific would speedily clear the seas of the ruffians. But a proposition so simple did not commend itself to diplomatic minds.

New Zealand laboured in troubled waters as to the relation of provincial and general governments. The subject was discussed more than once, but remained to harass future Parliaments. The Native Lands Court was taken into consideration, and Sir W. Martin was consulted, but no legislation was arrived at during the session. The Maori members were not idle. In August, Hori Kerei Taiaroa carried a resolution that there should be a council of native chiefs for the Middle Island, charged to devise means for the better administration of lands (whether held by Maoris under Crown grants or not) and of Maori property. Mr. McLean supported Taiaroa's proposal. In October, the same chief carried, by forty-one votes against fifteen, a resolution—That all bills or parts of bills specially referring to the native race be translated into the Maori language before discussion, and referred to the committee on Native Affairs. One member, Mr. Reynolds, said that the motion pandered too much to the Maori members. Karaitiana Takamoana raised a larger question. On his motion it was resolved that it was desirable that the native race should be represented in the other branch of the Legislature. He moved further—that a Maori should be appointed a member of the Executive Council to advise with the Minister for Native Affairs; that the Maori Representation Act should be amended, and the number of Maori members “increased to twelve, giving three Maori Representatives to each of the present Maori electoral districts; and that Europeans as well as Maoris should have the privilege of voting at election of Maori members of the

– 14 –

House of Representatives.” The propositions were rejected without a division. Katene, stimulated by the example of his colleagues, carried a resolution that “the government be requested to send down to this House a measure by which a runanga will be granted to the districts of the Bay of Islands and Mongonui; the object of such board to be the promotion of public works, education, the carrying out of law and order, &c. &c.” Nor was the success of the Maori orators due to contemptuous pity. The Governor reported that he had been assured by Mr. Fox that undoubtedly the best speeches of the session were those of the Maori members. Mr. Sewell declared that the Maori members contrasted favourably with many whom the colonists were pleased to call the superior race. Mr. McLean was in favour of the proposition to give to the Maoris a voice in the Legislative Council. Karaitiana Takamoana's motion was carried on the 15th Sept. On the 29th, Mr. Mantell moved in the Council that it was desirable that the Council should be informed of the views of the government on the subject, but after discussion the motion was withdrawn. Not only by Mr. Mantell and Mr. Sewell were kindly feelings expressed in debate in the Council. Colonel Russell did not scruple to say that the peace negotiated with the Maori king was due to the Maori members, through whom the first communications with the king-party had been made.

The new Maori members in the Representative House were the theme of universal praise in both Chambers.⁴ In the prorogation speech the Governor said that the high intelligence of the Maori members, and the judicious manner in which they exercised their functions, fully justified the

– 15 –

recommendation of the Representatives, and that he would consult his advisers as to the best means of giving it effect. A Bill to Amend and Consolidate the Laws relating to the Native Land Court passed the Legislative Council, and was sent to the other House on the 20th Oct. There it was not even read a second time; yet the subject had been earnestly considered by McLean and his colleagues. The Native Lands Act of 1865 had been amended in 1867, in 1868, and in 1869, but yet there were causes for discontent. The certificates issued were deceptive. The original Act of 1865 required that the native owners should be ascertained, but a proviso that “no certificate should be ordered to more than ten persons” was alleged to have deprived of their rights large numbers of proprietors. The definition of the estates or interests of the natives was left so vague, in the form of grant prescribed by the amending Act of 1869, that litigation, if not absolute warfare, would be engendered. Moreover, a single native could call upon the court to deal with a claim to land which nine out of ten of his tribe were unwilling to sell. They could not take refuge in apathy. They had to risk loss of land, or accept the burthen of litigation in a court whose fees were complained of as excessive.

Karaitiana Takamoana, of Hawke's Bay, visited Auckland in Jan., 1870, to lay the Maori grievances before Donald McLean. He had detected faults which had escaped notice. In 1870 McLean consulted many persons, and amongst them was Sir William Martin, who drew up in Jan., 1871, a careful statement of the amendments required. McLean requested Sir W. Martin to draft the necessary clauses, and the work enlarged under his hand until, in July, 1871, a draft bill was prepared which elicited from Mr. McLean the “best thanks of the government for the arduous labour” undertaken. A separate bill dealt with the native reserves, the income from which Sir W. Martin considered it proper to administer through the Native Department, and not in connection with the Land Court. Mr. Fenton, the chief judge of the Land Court, did not agree with all Sir W. Martin's proposals. His assistant judges furnished reports, which, with his own comments, were forwarded to the government.

– 16 –

Colonel Haultain reported upon the whole question. After the surrender by the Crown, in 1865, of its exclusive powers as to sale of land, to the end of 1870, the Land Court had heard 3489 applications for investigation of title in the North Island. Certificates or Crown grants had been issued in 2619 cases for an area exceeding 2,400,000 acres. “The natives are almost universally opposed to the employment of English counsel in contested cases. They say that these know nothing of Maori law and custom, and only protract the sittings and increase the expenses. If one side employs them the other must do the same; but they would like to see them altogether excluded from practising in the court.” So wrote Colonel Haultain. Another of his opinions was significant. “The Maoris have always been loth to part with their fertile land, and it is chiefly by confiscation that we have obtained any large tracts of really good land.” Many chiefs wrote earnestly to Colonel Haultain. Te Wheoro said it would be better if “lawyers’ agents and interpreters were disallowed in the land courts, as they make so many expenses. The money goes, and so does the land. Behold! there is the survey—one; the court—two; the lawyers—three; the interpreters—four; the Crown grant—five; and the giving of the land to the other side. The burden of this is great. Nothing could be objected if it was only the court and its interpreter.” Weary of forensic ways, he urged that a Maori runanga should settle all land disputes, and that the magistrates in their different districts should carry out the decisions of the runanga. An Arawa (an assessor in the Native Land Court) argued that the Acts relating to native lands should be translated. “I have never seen a translation of the Acts of 1865, though I have been in the chief judge's office for three years. I myself paid for printing, at the Bishop's press, some portions of the Acts. The natives would gladly read the Acts if they could get them, and there are intelligent men amongst them, well able to explain the Acts to others.” The Maoris highly prized the digest of criminal law prepared by Sir William Martin, and a summary of the Land Acts should be translated for their behoof. He also would banish lawyers. “It was to be expected that they would prolong cases in order to get more fees.”

– 17 –

In the General Assembly (Nov., 1871), Parata declared that much dissatisfaction existed with regard to adjudication by the Land Court in cases where there had not been actual survey. The Maoris had been informed that a plan ought to be deposited with the court before the case could be tried. How then stood the matter? Was there a law passed by the House, and kept back from the Maoris? Mr. McLean pointed out that there was a clause in the Act of 1865 authorizing new trials without survey. He confessed that in a matter affecting tribal rights the natives ought to have been made acquainted with the law in their own language, and that they had not been so made acquainted with it.

Though the government thanked Sir W. Martin, they did not adopt his draft bill. Mr. Fenton drew another which they preferred. Mr. Sewell introduced it, and took occasion to speak of Mr. Mantell thus: “I say now what I have always said, that if there is one person to whom the colony is more deeply indebted than to another for having brought about a better state of things between the two races through the working of the Native Land Court, that person is Mr, Mantell.”⁵ On one point, Sir W. Martin, Judge Fenton, and Mr. Sewell agreed, viz., that in order to prevent the sanctioned mischief created by facilities given to an individual to bring his tribe into litigation without their consent, it was essential to provide that there should be a thorough investigation before any title could be brought under the operation of the court. After long debates the bill was passed in the Council, but the Lower House declined to discuss it.

A Committee 011 Native Affairs, to which Taiaroa's resolution referred all clauses relating to the Maoris, was appointed. There were fourteen members, including Mr. McLean, and the four Maori chiefs. Five formed a

– 18 –

quorum, and they were empowered to send for persons or papers. Petitions from Maoris were referred to and reported on by them.

Ere long the old chief, Te Rangitake, gave convincing proof of his trust in the policy which McLean directed, and in which Maori chiefs had a voice. He had accepted the proffered peace in his retirement in the forests at the rear of Mount Egmont in 1864, but held aloof from the settlers. He refused to countenance Titokowaru, but would not associate with those who had robbed him of his land, destroyed his property, and slain his people. When Donald McLean became a minister in 1869, he lost no time in apprizing Te Rangitake that land at Waitara should be reserved for his use, but the old chief still held aloof. In 1872, his scruples were overcome. McLean was at Taranaki when Te Rangitake, after twelve years of estrangement, mingled again with Europeans. With four hundred followers he marched to Taranaki, where a repast was prepared for them at the Native Office. European inhabitants crowded to see the warrior whom some remembered, and all knew by repute. Children were allowed to enter the room in which he sat, and a bystander reported: “The old chief seemed to enjoy the levée, for as each batch of children came in, he laughed with delight as he took their tiny hands in his, and kindly shook them.” Mr. McLean pointed out the Maori significance of the speech, that when a chief trod in friendliness the path lately pursued by warparties, hostility was past, and even the thought of revenge for the dead was put away. Thus did Te Rangitake, denounced by the Governor's advisers in 1860 as “an essential savage,” and robbed of his land, return in 1872 with the warm approbation of another adviser. In the theatre of his wrongs the children of his persecutors came round him with affection, and by the “touch of nature which makes the whole world kin,” as by the wand of a magician the strifes of the past were quelled—for a time. There were none to carp at the reconciliation, for all men knew that in the past Te Rangitake ever spared the weak and made war only against the proud.

Titokowaru emerged from his forest haunts about the same time. Mr. McLean let him know that he would not

– 19 –

be molested if peaceful, and with about 30 followers he returned to the neighbourhood of Patea, the scene of his successes against Colonels McDonell and Whitmore, and of his discomfiture by Rangihiwinui and the men of Wanganui. There was less satisfaction at his implied pardon, but not much was said about it. Te Kooti was compelled to learn that a policy of peace was adopted, and that his day was past. Ropata Wahawaha's myrmidons were scouring the mountain fastnesses in which Te Kooti had lurked, and the passes from the Uriwera territory to Waikato were guarded by numerous bands. Nevertheless, he eluded them, and in June, 1872, it was reported that, “in spite of the various parties watching for him,” he passed with less than a score of companions to the sanctuary which Rewi had stipulated for, and Donald McLean had agreed to, at Te Kuiti in 1869. The government, though vexed at the escape of the marauder, whom it had hoped to bring, like Kereopa, to the gallows, did not commit a breach of the peace they had made. On the whole, everything seemed prosperous. There was a large debt to be paid in future; but thoughts of payment are put off like thoughts of death. Moreover, in the case of a State, not the borrower, but a successor pays. The first mixes the potion which the last must drink.

To carry out the authorized public works immigration was actively promoted. Dr. Featherston, the Agent-General, was instructed to send out, in 1872, 8000 adults. He had arranged in 1871 for the deportation of 6000 Germans and Scandinavians. Moreover, the railway contractors were to procure labourers, and the agent was to provide passages for them to an extent, including wives and families, of 5000 persons. There was in London an Emigrant and Colonists’ Aid Corporation, of which the Duke of Manchester was chairman. An agent visited New Zealand and purchased for the corporation more than 100,000 acres of land in the Manawatu district, undertaking to convey not less than 2000 statute adults to the island within a limited period. Some Norwegian immigrants were placed, on their arrival, at Palmerston, on the Manawatu river. Twenty acres were reserved for each family for two years, with a right of purchase. On purchase of them within 12 months 20

– 20 –

other acres were similarly reserved for purchase, so that in a short time each family might become possessed of 40 acres at the rate of £1 an acre. Swedes and Danes followed the Norwegians, and an official report⁶ stated that “their fears of their future neighbours were much lessened” by a present of potatoes and kind speeches from a Maori chief. Tidings of the illness of the Prince of Wales reached the colony early in 1872, and the general joy at his recovery gave occasion to the Governor to report that the loyal sympathy displayed by Englishmen and Maoris could not be surpassed in any portion of the empire. Prayers and thanksgivings were offered in the churches. At a crowded theatre the audience rose as one man and sang together “God save the Queen” and “God bless the Prince of Wales,” on the day when the recovery was announced. It was now known that in the colony, as in England, a few disloyal busy-bodies had put forward their own ideas as those of the public, and had been believed by the mass of mankind which is incapable of weighing evidence. An English newspaper which had deplored the manifest decay of loyalty in England was startled by the outburst of national grief at the illness of the heir to the throne. Its morality had been to study signs and to prophesy the immediate future. It had erred. It avenged itself by declaring, not that it had erred, but that “the community was astonished at its own profound emotion.” It professed to believe that Englishmen had been disloyal rather than its scribe mistaken. If men could appease their consciences by casting imputations on others, the world would cheaply become moral. A day of public thanksgiving was appointed in New Zealand. Services were held in all the churches on the 9th May, and the people responded to the proclamation by the government.

After a tour through the province of Marlborough, Sir G. Bowen started on an expedition to Lake Taupo—the abode of Poihipi Tukeraingi, who once stood almost alone in that central spot to resist the tenets of the Hau Haus. He met the Governor with oriental welcome at Tapuaeharuru (“resounding footsteps”), where hollow reverberations warn

– 21 –

the traveller how thin is the crust which separates him from the subterranean fires which rage continually from Whakare to Tongariro. He told how great had been the troubles of the loyal… “Still a few of us were ever true to the Queen: and, like the Horormatangi (sea-god) that dwelt of yore in Lake Taupo, and swallowed the evil monsters of the deep, we have now destroyed our enemies.” The Governor unprophetically told him that the Queen would ever maintain inviolate the treaty of Waitangi which Poihipi had signed. The Hau Hau flag had disappeared in the district, and the Union Jack met the eye. Hundreds of men once active or aidant in rebellion were at work to subdue the land by making roads, and Topia Turoa, the companion of Rangihiwinui in his march from Wanganui, welcomed the Governor at Tokano, at the south end of the great lake. Maoris were working for wages on the roads. At their head was Ngatote, a brother of Kereopa who had recently been executed. The loyal Arawa were everywhere eager to obtain good schools and roads. At Tauranga the Ngaiterangi chiefs, some of whom had fought at the Gate Pah, were as cordial as the Arawa. Two of them volunteered to escort the Governor through the forest from Kati Kati to Ohinemuri on the Thames. At Ohinemuri the Governor met Mr. McLean. Sir G. Bowen was anxious for an interview with the Maori king, but McLean's negotiations were resultless. The Governor's tour on the whole was described by McLean as “productive of the most beneficial results;” but the secluded king maintained a boundary which he would not pass to see the Governor, and which the Governor could not cross to look at him. The attempt seemed so easy and McLean's triumphs had been so great that the Governor could scarcely curb his vexation. Mr. McLean essayed to pacify him by declaring that “owing to various tribal differences the interview is likely to be deferred, and it is deemed advisable that no impatience should be displayed to hasten the negotiations.” There was a lamentable tone of exultation in some documents of the period, at a rumour that Tawhiao had given way to habits of intoxication—a tone which can be accounted for, but not justified, by disappointment at his obstinate seclusion. While the Governor was thus employed,

– 22 –

the Treasurer was abroad at the expense of the colony. Between the end of 1869 and the beginning of 1872 his travelling expenses were £3825, which he charged against various funds in round sums, and in which he did not affect to be economical. The New Zealand ass was saddled, and had to bear its burden.

A despatch from Lord Kimberley (1872) gives significance to the Naturalization Act of 1870, and its tendency to undermine reverence for the title of an Englishman, and the love of country on which that reverence was founded. In 1871 a convention, under Mr. Gladstone's and Earl Granville's auspices, was entered into at Washington to empower Englishmen and citizens of the United States mutually to part with and reassume their nationality, as a man puts on and off an easy glove. “I, A. B., being originally a citizen (of the U.S.) [or a British subject], and having become naturalized within the dominions … do hereby renounce my naturalization as … and declare that it is my desire to resume my nationality as …” This glib transfer could be made before the clerk of a court or before a consul. It was hardly to be wondered at that the original Act failed to clothe such a transaction with sufficient legality, and a new statute was passed in 1872 to remove all doubts. The pupil of Peel had become the Coryphaeus of the Manchester school in a sense never countenanced by his master. The decay of the republic was at hand when Roman freedom could be gained without desert. But while Rome remained great the words Civis Romanus sum never ceased to thrill the bosom of a Roman with a pride which the labours of Mr. Gladstone and Earl Granville tended to banish from the breast of an Englishman.

A significant meeting of Maori chiefs took place on the east coast. Ropata Wahawaha had been kind to captives made in his recent campaigns. To retain them amongst his own people until peace could be established was his aim. He called an assembly of the tribes, at his place, Mataahu. More than 3000 Maoris met, and under his guidance made friendly orations, hoisted the Union Jack in token of their loyalty to the Queen, and celebrated the rejection of Hau Hauism and a hearty return to Christianity.

– 23 –

“That, Sir,” said McLean in the House, “is the sequel to those operations which have been carried on under Major Ropata.”

A Maori clergymen, Rev. Mohi Turei, rendered thanks, and asked “for the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord, that we may show forth Thy praise and declare Thy goodness, not with our lips only, but with our whole hearts, and turn unto Thee, and walk before Thee in holiness and righteousness all the days of our lives, through Jesus Christ our Lord…” Ropata, wearing the sword presented to him by the Queen, exhorted the tribes to “pray always, in prosperity and in adversity, to be the children of Christ, as the first duty, and to be loyal to the Queen. God preserve the Queen and you (the people), and take you under His Divine protection.”

When the Assembly met (July, 1872), the Governor congratulated it on peace, prosperity, and public works. The government had no representative in the Council. The committee appointed to prepare the Address regretted that the Governor had not been “advised according to constitutional usage” to secure a representative. The omission was especially notable, because new members had recently been appointed. The attempt to dispense with a responsible organ of the government in a legislative chamber was not persisted in, and Mr. Hall and Mr. Miller were appointed to represent the government in the Upper House. Mr. Hall's first appearance as a minister had been with Fox in 1856. Stafford then cut short Fox's term of office. Ten years afterwards Hall joined Stafford. Fox turned Stafford out in 1869, and in 1872 Hall again cast in his fortune with Fox. Parata asked why the government had done nothing towards compliance with the resolution of the House, in 1871, that it was desirable that the native race should be represented in the Council. McLean announced that measures would be taken to call two members to the Council. Nearly three months elapsed, two changes of ministry had been made, and the session was almost at an end before the promise was fulfilled. Wi Tako Ngatata from the west, and Mokena Kohere from the east, were then (11th Oct.) appointed. The first had laid the English under

– 24 –

obligation by checking Hau Hauism at a critical time. The second had risked his life in campaign after campaign, and had received a sword from the Queen. Sir David Monro, whose appointment to the Upper House had been looked for as an act of courtesy, had found a constituency at Waikouati, and sat again amongst the Representatives. At his election he had denounced the policy of the government as “reckless, extravagant, and unstatesmanlike.”

The manner in which the ministry made and annulled ministerial offices induced Mr. Waterhouse to move in the Council that it was opposed to constitutional usage. The burning question of provincial and central powers had been raised, but evaded, in 1870 and 1871. Mr. Macandrew's proposition, in the latter year, to substitute, inter alia, one provincial government in the Middle Island for the several existing provinces, and to establish a uniform system of dealing with land throughout the colony, had been defeated by 41 votes against 22. In the same session Mr. Vogel had promised that the government would, in 1872, introduce a measure to deal with the whole subject. Mr. Gillies, member for Auckland City West, and Superintendent of the Auckland Province, asked for the fulfilment of the promise. Mr. Vogel said that the government were of opinion that “it would not be feasible to take from the provincial governments their present powers without throwing so much work on the central government as would break it down… We are not in any degree approaching the termination of provincial legislative powers. I think it quite possible that we shall see—perhaps after the lapse of considerable time—the establishment of a single province in each island, exercising larger provincial powers than those which at present exist.” The question was evaded without a division, but a future measure was hinted at. Supporters might be lost in 1872 if its provisions should not prove acceptable, and while the bill could be renewed there was no desire to meet its obligations. But no caution could ward off a blow even in 1872. Mr. Stafford moved hostile resolutions. Some effect was produced by a member for Hokitika, who showed how the Treasury had subsidized petty partisan newspapers by advertisements, and squandered most money where least result was obtained. Other favours there were, secret,

– 25 –

sweet, and precious, which Mr. Vogel justified on the ground that, as an old member of the fourth estate, he knew they would be agreeable to many newspaper proprietors. Corruption was hinted at by Mr. Reid, the member for Taieri. “Has the action of the government with regard to appointments been satisfactory? My reply is that they have not, and it would be interesting for us to know how many appointments are yet to follow, especially for members of this House. I may say that there are rumours about the lobbies that appointments are to be given to honourable members, but I do not know that they would condescend to accept them.”

Mr. Vogel, to whom the manœuvres complained of were chiefly imputed, showed little sense of the degradation they represented, but he was apparently heard without impatience:—“I should like to know whether entering this House is to be considered as a disqualification from holding office in the Civil Service of this colony… We are carrying the principle to a ridiculous extent if we exclude persons who have been members from receiving appointments…” “The statements which have been made are not reflections upon the government; they are reflections upon honourable members. If there are corruptors there must also be corrupted, and when we are charged with corruption it is also a charge against members of this House that they are capable of being corrupted.” By this process it might be argued that when the physician of Pyrrhus offered to poison his master, Fabricius became corrupt although he exposed the corruption of his tempter; or that when Fabricius refused to be dishonourable the physician ceased to be corrupt.⁷

Mr. Fox could hardly rely on such a defence, and early in the debate McLean was put forward. His aid had enabled Fox to oust the Stafford ministry in 1869. Confidence in him gave assurance of peace. His speech was a running

– 26 –

commentary on his dealings with the natives. The Board of Advice at Taranaki, which comprised Maori chiefs; the peace with the Maori king; the campaigns of Rangihiwinui and Ropata; the civil service then being rendered by Rangihiwinui, “as faithful and good an officer as there is in the country;” the intention of the government to avail themselves still more of Maori advice; the special intention “to restore to Te Rangitake a portion of his ancestral property;” the prospect of a general amnesty;—formed the burden of his address. At its close he revealed a startling proof of the confidence reposed in himself. A suggestion had been made that he should take office in the new government on the downfall of Mr. Fox, but he had stated that he should decline to do so. Yet, after this public statement members expressed a hope that McLean's scruples would be overcome. One member declared: “If the government are saved upon this question it will be through the reputation of Mr. McLean.” They were not saved. By forty votes against thirty-seven, Mr. Stafford's first resolution (on administration) was carried. The four Maori members were equally divided, for and against the resolution. Mr. Vogel probably thought them stupid. A ministry hung in the balance, and yet these men talked about peace, patriotism, and justice. Sir G. Bowen wrote that it was reported that the chiefs said that as both sides were profuse in expressions of friendliness they determined not to be unfriendly to either, but to allow the dispute to be settled by the Pakeha votes. Fox resigned (Sept., 1872) and Stafford formed a ministry. Mr. Waterhouse declined to take office. Mr. Sewell became Colonial Secretary. Mr. Fitzherbert, Mr. Gillies (Treasurer), Mr. Reid, and Mr. Curtis were his colleagues. Stafford announced that the government would maintain the unity of the colony with the seat of government at Wellington. He enumerated the measures which he would proceed with before the recess. But he was not fated to reach that haven of rest. His assumption of responsibility for native affairs was not calculated to breed confidence. In 1860 he concurred in the rape of the Waitara; and in later times he had allowed Col. McDonell so to deal with a few cases of horse-stealing as to rouse Titokowaru

– 27 –

to resistance. He had transported (without warrant, and untried) Te Kooti, who had never been a rebel. He had converted the escape of his captive into a dreary catalogue of murders, which only the gallantry of Rangihiwinui and Ropata and the prudence of McLean had been able to crush. He had insulted and dismissed the man on whom Maoris looked as their friend. To secure the aid of that man he was now willing to arrange that if McLean would, on the fall of his colleagues, come over to the camp of the victors, McLean should retain the office for which all men thought him fitted. Failing to secure McLean he would himself be Native Minister, and deal with Maoris through local officers. Not to such hands would either colonists or natives submit themselves. Sir G. Bowen lost no time in soliciting for Mr. Fox, Mr. Vogel, Mr. McLean, and another outgoing minister, permission to retain the title of “honourable”⁸ after their retirement.

Eruera Patuone, the brother of Waka Nene, died a few days after Stafford became minister. He announced that the government would accord a public funeral to one of the most faithful allies they ever had. McLean told the House that in anticipation of the old man's death he had issued the necessary instructions before vacating office. Captain Wynyard, son-in-law of the deceased chief (and son of

– 28 –

General Wynyard), had died in New Zealand, and Patuone was to be buried by the side of his white son-in-law. On the same day (19th Sept.) that this tribute to a faithful ally was promised, Taiaroa, who had voted against the downfall of McLean, put a crucial question to Stafford. Would the government consent to the appointment of a committee to inquire into the unfulfilled promises in the Middle Island; or would they inquire into the matter? Stafford was scarcely ingenuous in reply. He did not object to the committee, but had no power over the order in which notices were brought before the House. McLean thought the reply unsatisfactory. Precedence could easily be given to Taiaroa's motion. Stafford took the hint. Precedence was given, and Taiaroa carried his motion without a division.

Another Maori matter cropped up. Tauroa, a chief of the Pakakohi hapu on the west coast, had joined Titokowaru. Tauroa's friends averred that he was compelled to do so, and Colonel Whitmore stated in the Legislative Council that Titokowaru “sent parties to bring Tauroa and his hapu to his camp by force.” When Titokowaru was routed and Rangihiwinui was pursuing Te Kooti, the resident magistrate at Patea and Major Noake (commanding the local force, nearly 300 (composed principally of Maoris) marched to the abode of Tauroa, who had refused to act with Titokowaru any longer. Tauroa had fought against the English in 1866, and his tribal rights had then been declared confiscated, but Mr. Parris had afterwards permitted him to settle on a block of land, on which he was living peaceably when Titokowaru compelled or persuaded him to take arms. Major Noake with his small army found Tauroa willing to submit to the Queen. The resident magistrate reported: “Tauroa does not plead anything in extenuation, and has thrown himself entirely on the mercy of the government.” With 122 others the chief surrendered, and was handed over to the Ngatiporou allies, who were serving in the forces on the west coast. But such chivalrous treatment was brief. Tauroa was sent to Wellington, convicted of high treason, and sentenced to be hanged, drawn, and quartered. The sentence was commuted to

– 29 –

three years’ imprisonment.⁹ Captain Fraser declared that— “The self-denial of the chief, and his affectionate attention to his people during their incarceration, won for him the respect of everyone connected with the gaol, and (Captain Fraser) was so favourably impressed with his conduct that he told him that when the time came for his delivery from the gaol, he would do all in his power to obtain for him the restoration of a portion of his lands.” Rangihiwinui and others pleaded for their countrymen. At last Donald McLean appeared, and Tauroa with the remnant of his hapu was taken back to Wellington in 1872. Then new difficulties arose. The white settlers at Patea resented the proposal that Tauroa should return to the land of his birth. McLean feared it would be injudicious to restore him at once. The remigration was arrested. The natives were told that they might quarter themselves on their countrymen anywhere except at their homes. McLean hoped to allot land to them out of Tauroa's hereditary possessions, when discontent amongst the settlers had subsided. How the discontent might manifest itself was adumbrated by a paragraph which at this time was quoted by Mr. Mantell in the Council, from a newspaper. “We are assured, however, that if there is any further interference the Maoris

– 30 –

will be shot down like dogs, as a number of determined men are armed and ready to act. This is the best argument in such a case with savages, if the Native Agents and Native Office cannot maintain the indubitable right of the settlers. The argument is a potent one with the Australian blacks.”

Potent indeed had been the rifle and the gun against the Australian native, and the wide domains of Queensland had witnessed and were witnessing in 1872 unnumbered murders committed on a race ignorant of fortifications, and armed only with wooden missiles. But what the editor called argument was not less brutal because it was true. Colonel Whitmore, who had met Tauroa in the field, admitted that it was a Maori custom for a successful chief to compel the adherence of others, “and it seemed to be a peculiarity in the native character that it never occurred to them to resist or refuse under those circumstances the constraint that was put upon them.” He sympathized with Tauroa, but said that Fox had created a special difficulty by improperly telling the settlers at Patea that Tauroa should never return there. Thus McLean's hands were bound, and Colonel Whitmore feared that if the unfortunate tribe should appear in its birthplace it would go from imprisonment to death. After an adjourned debate the Council resolved that it was “desirable to act with clemency and liberality towards the chief Tauroa, and the Pakakohi hapu, lately prisoners at Dunedin, who have been dispossessed of their land.” On the day when the Council thus resolved, Taiaroa brought forward a kindred motion in the Representative House. Parata supported it. Would the government restore a fragment of Tauroa's birthright to him? Let them not refer to the deeds of the late government. Maoris wished to know what was to become of their brethren,—whether they were to be well or ill treated,—whether they were to exist or to perish. Mr. Fox thought it was highly dangerous for any one but McLean to deal with a problem so difficult. Several members asked Taiaroa to withdraw his motion. Katene joined in the entreaty, but denied that Maoris only were in fault in the past. Was there not the Waitara land seizure? Did they not know that if Te Rangitake had been willing to abandon to the Pakeha what his father on a deathbed

– 31 –

had enjoined him never to lose, the government would have been friendly to him? Say not then that the Maori had committed all the faults. “It was alleged that there were difficulties in doing anything for Tauroa and his people; but the promised act of grace was long in being fulfilled, and therefore it was that the Maori members joined in urging a speedy determination, so that these people who were wanderers on the face of the earth might be settled somewhere …” Let not the government make matters worse by selling the land which might be needed for the returned prisoners. In deference to the desire of the House, Taiaroa withdrew his motion; hoping at the same time that the government would leave the matter open for a just settlement by not selling land in the district in the meantime.

On the 4th October, Mr. Vogel moved that “the House has no confidence in the present government.” There had been much secret management and Mr. Vogel considered a majority secure. But Fox was not more popular than Stafford, and it was arranged that Fox should declare that his name should not appear in the ministry to be formed on the fall of Stafford. McLean, of course, as Native Minister, was to be a tower of strength. Vogel, resolute to take office, spoke of the “exquisite tact” of the gentleman who thus gave way to a politician so young and inexperienced as himself when compared to Mr. Fox. He assailed the government for having, during their month of office, followed “the footsteps of their predecessors.” He revealed unintentionally his own disappointment because he had not in 1865 been taken into Stafford's government when Mr. Weld was driven from office. He stood forward as the champion of provincialism. “All the prominent members of this House who are provincial in their tendencies” (he said) “were members of the party whose vote turned out Mr. Weld's government, and who in a little room in this building asked Mr. Stafford to accept the position of head of the government under the assurance—alas! it was a very delusive one—that he would carry out the policy of his party. It is a matter of history how he became released from his colleagues a few months afterwards, and joined himself with those whom, by the assistance of the provincial party, he had before turned out.” He descanted

– 32 –

about the Treasury accounts; he extolled McLean, and predicted that “native affairs in disorder,” and a stop to colonization, would be the result of Stafford's continuance in office. A relic of the contempt formerly felt in the colony for the mover was shown in Stafford's reception of the motion. No one rose to reply to it, and when Vogel complained that discussion would thus be “burked,” Stafford said there was nothing to debate. By 37 votes against 35 the motion was carried. Parata, the western Maori member, with Katene and Taiaroa supported the resolution which seemed calculated to restore McLean as Native Minister. The influence of the goldfields population was powerful in all divisions. There were 33 members for the Northern Island, and there alone Maori questions were dangerous, but 45 members for the Middle Island were able to overbear them. Stafford asked for a dissolution. Sir G. Bowen wished to know whether the existing Assembly would grant supplies. He added (in a postcript to one minute) that he would not object to testing the opinion of Parliament upon the point at issue:—on condition that his correspondence be placed before it, and that the passing of the Appropriation Act be deemed the proof that Parliament agreed with Mr. Stafford. Stafford replied, that but for the postcript he would have tendered his resignation at once. He submitted that before making proposals in Parliament founded on a contemplated dissolution, he ought to “be enabled to announce that on supplies being granted Parliament would be dissolved. By adopting any other course the duty of deciding whether Parliament should be dissolved or not would in fact be relegated to the House instead of resting, as it constitutionally does, with his Excellency.” It was Sir G. Bowen's habit to discuss profusely with men of all parties every question of the hour; and those who thought his confidence most intimate and gracious, were surprised to find that he had poured into the ears of many what they had thought reserved for their own. He had arrived at the conclusion that Vogel could form a ministry, and he declined to give the pledge desired. He laboured to secure a fresh administration containing Mr. Vogel. He urged that all proper attempts to form a ministry had not been exhausted, and that if circumstances

– 33 –

were different his action would be different. He did not touch upon the implication that he had been ready to surrender the prerogative of dissolution to the will of the House. Mr. Stafford, after one month's tenure of office, placed his resignation in the Governor's hands.

Mr. Fox was not to be one of the new ministry. Donald McLean resumed office as Native Minister. The knotty question of the confiscated lands was to be decided by him in conjunction with Maori chiefs. In the management of native reserves, Maori chiefs were to be associated with the existing commissioners. McLean was prone to magnify his office and to assume that none but himself could deal wisely with the Maori question. His colleagues were compelled by public opinion to accept him at his own estimation, and he easily induced them to put Ngatata and Kohere into the Legislative Council. The final constitution of the ministry was deferred until the end of the session. Some offices left unfilled became baits to the expectant, and postponed the anger of the disappointed. Mr. Vogel could not safely assume the position of head of the ministry, but assured himself that he could be the real leader under the name of another, who came from an unexpected quarter. Mr. Waterhouse, a comparatively new colonist, but a man of position who had migrated from South Australia, and had in 1870 become a member of the Legislative Council, had publicly stated to the Council (13th Sept.), that “no consideration whatever would induce him to identify himself with any party or any administration” in New Zealand. Therefore he had declined to join Mr. Stafford, although there was “no difference of opinion between them.” It was said that his resolution fell before the persuasive entreaties of the Governor. On the 11th October, Mr. Waterhouse became the chief minister without salary. It was correctly anticipated that he would either be a creature in the hands of others or that he would cast off an ignominious position. Mr. Miller, by whose amendment Waterhouse's condemnation of the Fox ministry had been barely qualified in August, now declined to rejoin the remnant of that ministry which Mr. Waterhouse was nominally to lead. The latter, in announcing the fact,

– 34 –

publicly deplored the loss of Mr. Miller's “ability and integrity of character.”

The new ministry was in no danger throughout the brief remainder of the session. The railway policy of the Fox administration was pursued. Seven hundred and sixty-four miles of railway, to be constructed at the public cost, were sanctioned. The inadequacy of New Zealand ministries in fulfilling promises was speedily displayed. Wi Tako Ngatata, taking his seat (15th Oct.) in the Council, asked for the postponement of a bill by which lands, to which titles were in dispute, were affected. He wished to see a translation of the bill, but none had been made. On the 18th October Mr. Mantell carried a motion that in order that Her Majesty's subjects of the Maori race might have full opportunity of considering legislation affecting them, all bills of such purport should be “prepared, translated, printed, and circulated at the earliest possible date prior to their introduction.” McLean did not produce his measure for constituting native local councils until the 22nd October. It was to apply only to what were called native districts. Everything was to be done with consent of the Maoris. McLean said they were the best judges of their own disputes, and that no English lawyer or judge could understand them so fully as they could, but the House was averse to entertain the subject at the close of a session, and McLean withdrew it. A measure dealing with remnants of the celebrated Rangitikei-Manawatu land case was introduced at an equally inconvenient date. On the 22nd Oct., McLean moved the second reading. After all Dr. Featherston's labours, and after the judicial decision accepted by so many natives, McLean assured the House that so inexorable was the pugnacity of Maoris that “it would have been dangerous to attempt anything like forcible measures for the occupation of the district. This much he could say, that if such measures had been resorted to, no settlers would now be living upon that block.” To justify his position he declared that the imputation that he was responsible for the Waitara wrongs was erroneous. He did not deny that he had advised Governor Browne in March, 1859; but long before “disturbance broke out he was on the east coast, and did not know what was taking place.

– 35 –

He afterwards removed to the Middle Island, having determined to retire for two years on account of illness. On his return from Otago after an absence of a few weeks he first heard that war had been declared at Waitara.” His enemies declared that he had secluded himself under the plea of illness when he saw the gulf into which Governor Browne's advisers were about to plunge, and even friends must have been disappointed, when after twelve years the old man could make no better defence than the ambiguous statement dragged into the debate on the Rangitikei-Manawatu Bill. It may have been that McLean like others had something to learn in 1859, and had been wise enough to learn it. It is certain that his reputation in the colony in 1872 enabled him to take higher ground than he could aspire to when the Taranaki conspirators obtained the ear of the Governor in 1859, and McLean, like Crispus, yielding to the torrent, defended in 1860 at Kohimarama the wrong doing at Waitara.

The bill of 1872 related more to provincial necessities than to Maori tenure. McLean had reserved nearly 14,000 acres for the Maoris in order that the government might derive benefit from the decision of the Land Court in 1869. An Act was required to make valid a grant of the land, which was provincial, and the province of Wellington demanded compensation, although by the reserve of less than 14,000 acres McLean had secured quiet possession of 240,000. A clause added to the bill appointed the Speaker (Dillon Bell) to decide what compensation should be given. The clause was rejected in the Upper House. Vogel asked the Lower House not to insist upon it, but its author, Mr. Fitzherbert, foiled him on a division. Vogel equivocated, and Mr. Fox declared—“The House has now done the maddest thing I have ever known any Assembly to be guilty of.” A prorogation terminated the dispute, and the efforts of the session were not altogether thrown away. A Rangitikei-Manawatu Crown Grants Bill, previously passed, enabled the Governor to fulfil agreements with the Maoris. The Speaker furnished an opinion only, as the Attorney-General had formally pronounced that he could not give an award. The opinion (brought before the Representatives in 1874) elicited angry disputes. It recog-

– 36 –

nized the broad facts that after the decision of the Native Lands Court in 1869 there were disturbances, the surveyor's pegs were removed by the discontented, and McLean, with the earnest concurrence of the general government and of the province, had hastened to the spot to allay trouble, and make needful concessions. All were glad when he made them in the shape of reserves. Fox telegraphed from the spot (Nov. 1870): “There were only three possible courses:—1st, to fight for it, which neither the government nor the Assembly would do; 2nd, to render settlement possible, by satisfying the natives as McLean has done; or 3rd, to let it stand over for years. The course pursued has been by far the best and cheapest of the three.” For the 13,875 acres reserved by McLean, and taken from the provincial estate, the province of Wellington claimed compensation; and the Representatives, on the opinion of their Speaker, seemed willing to grant i