E—No. 1

THE GOVERNOR'S DESPATCH ON '•SEIGNORIAL BIGHT." No. 2.

OOTBRSOn's DESPATCH. 4th Dec, 1860.

COPT OF A DISPATCH FROM GOVERNOR GORE BROWNE to his grace the duke of NEWCASTLE.

No. 126. Government House, Auckland, 4th December, 1860. Mr Lord Duke, 1. I have the honour to acknowledge and beg to express my best thanks for Mr. Chichester Fortescue's Despatch No. 55, of the 27 ih August last. 2. I am desire! in that Despatch to furnish a full Report to Your Grace upon " the question of an ■alleged right, distinct frcm one of property, existing in the Chief of a tribe, to assent to or forbid the sale of any land belonging to members of the tribe, in cases where all the owners are willing to sell, and how far such aright has been, or ought to be recognised by the Crown." And I am also desired to give you my own views, and all the information in my power, on " the further questions whether there are reasons, apart from the Treaty of Waitangi, in favour generally of the recognition of such a right, and whether they justify the claims of Wiremu Kingi upon "the present occasion." 8. I am afraid that in the endeavour to give an answer to these questions, I shall have to ask for Your Grace's attention sit much length. They involve, in reality, an examination of the Native Tenure to laud generally, and specially of the Ngatiawa title at Taranaki: of the status of the Chiefs before and since the establishment of British Sovereignty: of the principles which have guided successive Governors of New Zealand on the Taranaki question: of the proceedings immediately connected with the purchase at Waitara last year: of the misrepresentations that have been spread abroad respecting those proceedings: of the relation between Wiremu Kingi's insurrection and the Native King Movement and Land League: and lastly, of the present aspect of the subject with reference to th« special questions raised by Your Grace. 4. In submitting my own opinions on these subjects, gathered as they are from events that have occurred during a period of more than twenty years, I have desired to say nothing which was not either within my own knowledge, or supported by some reliable authority. In order that these authorities should be placed before you in a readable shape, I have caused them to be printed separately as an Appendix to this Despatch, with distinct references to the publication in which each can be found. I. THE NATIVE TENURE. 5. In order that Your Grace should see how various are the views which have been entertained on the subject of the Native title to land, I have collected all that I could find to be deserving of attention; and I submit for your perusal extracts from the opinions of 1. The Bishop of New Zealand. 2. Sir William Martin, late Chief Justice. 3. Mr. Busby, formerly British Resident. 4. Archdeaeon Maunsell. 5 Mr. Clarke, formerly Chief Protector of Aborigines. 6. The Native Board of 1856, comprising the then late and Acting Native Secretaries, and the Surveyor-General. 7. Mr Spain, formerly H. M. Land Claims Commissioner. 8. Rev. Mr Hamlin, Church Missionary. 9. Mr. Swaiuson, late Attorney-General. 10. Archdeacon Hadfield. 11. Mr. Shortland, formerly a Protector of Aborigines. 12. Mr. White, for the last ten years Interpreter in the Native Office. 13. Rev. Mr. Buddie, Superintendent of the Wesleyan Mission. 14. Mr. McLean, Chief Commissioner for the Purchase of Native Lands. 15. Rev. J. A. Wilson, Church Missionary. 6. Of the eighteen persons here named, nine were in this country before the establishment of British Sovereignty, and have maintained to the present time the closest relations with the Native race; five more have been in New Zealand for between 18 and 20 years; and the other four, who are no longer in the Colony, were all from their official position necessarily called upon to form a judgment on the question of Native Tenure. 7. The result of all these enquiries has certainly not been to present a very clear idea of what Native Title is, and still less of what it is not. Chief Justice Arney said in the Legislative Council the other day, " I have found much inconsistency and contradiction but no novelty, and have derived this consolation, namely, of reflecting that little as I know ot the Native Title, of the (so called) Maori law of real property, the generality of people, even of the learned, the periti, know little ! more (1). 8. At the same time, I think there is no reason to doubt that, notwithstanding the variety of rules in different localities and among different tribes, the title to land among the ISatives of this country

'1) Chief Justice, App. S. 1.

5