E—No. 1.

TO NATIVE AFFAIRS.

craft alongside the pier of the port of Auckland is owned by Maories. If the natives do not, to an even ; greater extent, participate in the expenditure on public works, it is mainly due to the circumstance , that they are, in many parts of the island, indisposed to cede territory, and would oppose the execution . of public works on lauds over which their title has not been extinguished—even in cases in which it might appear politic and just to undertake such works. And it would be a great error to , represent that they derive no benefit from the various institutions for the administration of law and the ( preservation of order in the European settlements: since those institutions are essential to the existence of the civilized community, to which the natives owe—to speak of no other advantages—a market for i their produce and for their land. They benefit both directly and indirectly by the establishments of the the Governor, Supreme Court, Post Office (of which they make no small use), Police, and Gaols, lhe magistrates in all the settled districts of the northern island are called upon not unfrequently to decide civil cases between Europeans and Maories, and sometimes even pure native disputes. Even by the legislative branch—with which, at present, the natives have the least concern—it would be untrue to allege that they ate not benefitted. . 71. The practical conclusion is that, in those years in which the demand for native produce has brought the aborigines large profits in the European markets, and in which they have consequently largely availed themselves of the advantages of a civilized state, their contributions to the revenue have constituted a fair, but not, it would seem, more than a fair, equivalent; whilst in years of slack demand those contributions probably do not exceed the sums returned to them by Government in direct and exclusive benefits. Q >y RIcnMOND

turners sell and consume a very undue share of merchandize, if the statements here given are accurate— £

A.B. shipped in 1855, 8311 „ in IHM, 3315 C. D. shipped inIUM, 10,893 iu)Bs6, 8570 E . F . r .i : ,ess }l5 _ 760 G,F. «hpd.in!Bss ' ggg, „ in 1856 J

Sub-Enclosure 1 to Enclosure 2 in No, 1. COPY OF A MEMORANDUM BY THE NATIVE SECIIETAKY. 25th June, 1858. In reference to some of the provisions of the " Native Territorial Bill," I beg to submit the following observations. . , ~ , 1. The change contemplated by this Bill would confuse the Native mind, disturb existing Treaties with them, cause new complications in reference to Title, and very much increase the difficulty of obtaining land in blocks of sufficient extent, to promote systematic English settlement. 2. Nothing will complicate, or retard, the purchase of Land from the Natives so much as the existence of different modes for its acquisition. . 3. Land is now being acquired in large quantities, the Native Title to the whole ot the available land in the Wellington Province, excepting about One Million of Acres, is already extinguished, large blocks contiguous to each other are being acquired, at a moderate cost, in the Auckland Province, and it doesliot appear that a change would induce speculation and competition, in acquiring only isolated spots of the best land, would tend to a peaceable settlement of the country. 4. It is true that the Bill proposes certain restrictions and prohibitions, but when a spirit of speculation in land is once created and sanctioned by Legislation, it would become a most difficult and invidious task for the Government in many cases to enforce such restrictions. 5. The Natives themselves who are much interested, do not desire any change, excepting perhaps a few who are deeply involved in debt, and who would make any sacrifice to be relieved from their creditors. It would not, therefore be just to compromise the interests and wishes of the people generally, for the sake of those few. It is well ascertained that the New Zealand tribes regard their land as a National property, the cession of which when decided on, they prefer making as a National Act to Her Majesty, even while they are aware, that the sums to be realized by such cessions are inconsiderable. Nor do they generally attach so much importance to the pecuniary consideration received for land held by them in common, as to the future consequences resulting from its alienation. 6. The limits and restrictions imposed by this Bill, together with the charge of 10s. per acre on all land when transferred to Europeans, would be regarded by the Natives as an unfair interference with their rights, and an unjust exaction of money, for land to which they had established a valid title, at their own expense. , ■ , 7. For these and other reasons which might be adduced, I consider the Bill in its present shape open to serious objections, inasmuch as the first object proposed by it, that of accurately defining Native Title, might be attained without attempting to modify such Title in the manner therein contemplated, and the second object proposed by it, viz., that of facilitating the acquisition of land by persons settling in the Colony, is one for which existing arrangements fully provide. The foregoing are the objections I have to offer to the first Bill, of which a draft has been referred to me. I have now to offer some observations on the second Bill which is before the House of Much of what I have already stated with regard to the first Bill is also applicable to the second. The Bth clause provides that the " Native District Registration Act, 1858," may have jurisdiction over Jands to which the Native Title is unextinguished. Ido not consider that jurisdiction should be given

T _ Minute by Ministers — 3 Tn general reply to this V Memorandum it la sufficient to state:— First, That the greater part of the argument! used by the Native Secreq tary apply to a Draft Iliill never introduced or t even approved of by Mm - ieters, to which the NaT tive Secretary was quite 3 unjustified in referring. Secondly, That the Naif tive Secretary conclude! i. by recommending a measure substantially identical with—indeed copied g in all its provisions from —the Bill introduced by r Ministersand reserved for r , Her Majesty's assent, but destitute of any safeguard against the rashest action r on the part of the Execu- !. tive. [ The points of real difference between the Ministers and the Native Sell cretary are discussed in i Memorandum of the Iμ* mer dated 29th September t 1858. C. W. R. a r f f

Minute by Minufrt— ' No part of the Bill conr tains any euch provision X —the clauses referred to

15