FIVE POUNDS REWARD!

STOLEN from the Club-House between the hours of 8 & 10 o'clock on Sunday morning last, a Gold Curb Guard and Silver hunting WATCH. The above Reward will be paid to any party who may give such information as may lead to the recovery of the same, on application to JOHN KELLY, or to WM. WILSON.

Oct. 7th, 1840.

ADVERTISEMENT.

We are glad to notice that Mr. Michael Fitz Patrick, of the "Hobson Hotel," has nearly completed a road (sufficiently wide for vehicles to pass to and fro) from Kororarika to Matavia Bay, without any exception one of the prettiest and most retired spots in the Bay of Islands. This was always a favored spot, and this Road will give to Kororarika what has been long and much wanted, namely, a sweet and pleasant promenade after the hour of business. We long for the moon-light to come in, when we anticipate many pleasant evening Walks. CORRESPONDENT.

THE NEW ZEALAND ADVERTISER, AND BAY OF ISLANDS GAZETTE.

KORORARIKA:- October 8, 1840.

We have objected to the Commissioner's Act, because of its undisguised hostility to the Native interests. On this ground it is utterly impossible that we should ever be reconciled to it by any circumstances whatever in its application. It is as a whole, with regard to the Aborigines, a most flagrant violation of rational faith, and of the great natural principles of truth and justice, and nothing can alter its character but a new and opposite principle infused into it. The more we think of it the more it appears in our eyes irreconcileable with right. And as we are sure that his Excellency the Lieutenant Governor is not morally so, we neither doubt whether he is loyally bound to put it in force. At all events, remonstrance from him to the Colonial Office would, without question, have its due effect, for there is no room to doubt, that the published instructions of the Home Government have been altogether contravened.

That the object of the Colonization of this country was ostensibly (and we are bound to understand men according to their ostensible meaning) the protection of Native Rights from violation is clear, from the following extracts:

"It further appears, that extensive purchases of land have been obtained from the Natives, and that several hundred persons have recently united from this country to occupy and cultivate these lands. The spirit of adventure has been so vigorously roused that it can be no longer doubted that an extensive settlement of British subjects will be rapidly established in New Zealand; and that unless protected and restrained by necessary laws and regulations, they will repeat, unchecked, in that quarter of the Globe, the same process of war and spoliation under which uncivilized tribes have almost immediately the immediate vicinity of from the Nations of Christendom. To mitigate, if possible to avert these disasters, and to rescue the Emigrants themselves from the evils of a lawless state of society, it has been resolved to adopt the most effectual measures for establishing amongst them a settled form of civil Government. To accomplish this design is the principal object of your mission."

We have already stated that we acknowledge New Zealand a Sovereign and Independent State, so far, at least, as it is possible to make that acknowledgment in favor of a people composed of numerous dispersed and petty Tribes, who possess few political relations to each other, and are incompetent to act or even to deliberate in concert. But the admission of their rights though inevitably qualified by this consideration, is binding on the faith of the British Crown. The Queen in common with her immediate predecessor, disclaims for herself and her subjects, every pretension to seize on the Islands of New Zealand, or to govern them as a part of the dominion of Great Britain, unless the free and intelligent consent of the Natives, expressed according to their established usages, shall be first obtained.

"All dealings with the Aborigines for their lands must be conducted on the same principles of duty, honor, and good faith. You must have your mission to them for the recognition of Her Majesty's Sovereignty in the Islands. Nor is this all: they must not be permitted to enter into any contract in which they might be the ignorant and unintentional authors of injuries to themselves. You will not for example, purchase from them any the retention of which by them, would be essential or highly conducive to their own comfort, or subsistence. The acquisition of Land, by the Crown, for the future Settlement of British subjects, must be confined to such districts as the Natives can alienate without distress or serious inconvenience, to themselves. To secure the observance of this rule will be one of the first duties of their official protector."

The same point is corroborated by the reluctance expressed by the Ministers to establish a British Colony here—the interests of the Natives only deemed of sufficient weight to counterbalance that reluctance.

On the other hand, the Ministers of the Crown have been restrained by higher motives from engaging in such an enterprise. They have deferred to the advice of the Committee appointed by the House of Commons in the year 1838, to enquire into the state of the Aborigines residing in the vicinity of the settlements, and have concurred with in thinking that the increase of national wealth power promised by the acquisition of New Zealand, would be most inadequate compensation for the injury which must be inflicted on itself, by embarking in a measure unjust, and but too certainty fraught with calamity to numerous and inoffensive People, whose title to and to the Sovereignty of New Zealand is indisputable, and has been solemnly recognized by the British Government. We retain these opinions in unimpaired force, and though circumstances entirely beyond our control have at length compelled us to alter our course, we do not scruple to admit, that we depart from it with extreme reluctance.

From all this we must infer that the British Ministers never intended to deny the rights of the Natives. With regard to another point connected with it, the Natives' independence, it is most unaccountably strange, that it should ever have been called in question. The same extracts are decisive as to the manner in which the Crown understands the matter. We have marked in Italics the passages to which we would direct attention. And if there had been no allusion to the matter in the Instructions, nothing can destroy the fact, that the independent Sovereignty of this country has been recognized by the British Crown. However, it may not have been so distinctly perceivable, that the Queen has not an atom of sovereignty or property here but by the free and intelligent consent of the Natives, expressed according to their established usages. And, moreover, the Chiefs, are to be induced to sell their lands to the Crown in preference to any other purchaser.

"It is not, however, to the nerve of the Sovereign Authority of the Queen that your mission and yours are to be confined, for your negotiations directed. It is further necessary that the Chiefs should be induced, if possible, to contract with you in performing her Majesty, that henceforward no land shall be settled, either gratuitously or otherwise, except to the Crown of Great Britain."

Which is a clear admission of their perfect right to choose their purchasers. We are, then, compelled to say that the Act of Council relating to the colonization of this country is as "baseless" as the "fabric of a vision," and that Sir George Gipps' arguments, eloquent and full of research as they were, failed most completely in reference to the points which were fundamental. And though we admit that Sir George was furnished with powers as large as was required to fulfil the Instructions, we are quite sure that he had no power given him to contravene them. Thus far the Native rights—now we must advert to those of European Settlers. "The following passage is the only one which gives any colour to the proceedings and arguments of the Legislative Council:—

"It is, therefore, immediately on your arrival, announce by Proclamation, addressed to the Queen's subjects in New Zealand, that her Majesty will not acknowledge as valid, any title to land which either has been, or hereafter be acquired in this country, which is not either derived from or confirmed by by grant made in her Majesty's name and on her behalf."

But close attention to the terms of this instruction is sufficient to show, that her Majesty's intention was not to upset any possession on the plea of its not having been held of the Crown. Her Majesty does not claim the lands held by Europeans by equitable purchase from the Natives. The phrase in italics in the above passage shews, that she regards as fiction the silly doctrine of all lands possessed by Englishmen being held of the Crown. The lands purchased in this country during its state of acknowledged independence, were held by Native Chiefs, who were as Sovereign as the Queen of England or the King of France, and they had an unquestionable power to give Titles. When their Sovereignty was transferred to the British crown, that power to give or confirm titles in Law was necessarily transferred with it—for it is a first principle in jurisprudence, that the Sovereign power—of whatever kind it be—is the only authority by which legal institutions can be constituted, and legal proceedings directed and maintained. But titles already in existence need only confirmation. They do not, where they have clear evidence, require to be re-given. And it is evident that from the above passage the titles already in existence, if found to be equitable, are already acknowledged to be good, and only remain to be confirmed by the new Sovereign of the country. The caution immediately subjoined to the above extract, fully bears us out in this interpretation.

"You will, however, at the same time take care to dispel any apprehensions which may be created in the minds of the settlers that it is intended to dispossess the owners of any property which has been acquired on equitable conditions, and which is not upon a scale that might be prejudicial to the main interests of the community."

The right of Natives and that of European Settlers being, in fact, one and the same in this matter, it is impossible to consider them apart with due effect.

It was a great error of the Crown to commit Legislation on one of the most important subjects ever under its notice, to the solitary judgment of one of its servants, at the distance of half the Globe from its own immediate cognizance. Such an Act as that before us, would scarcely have remained an hour before the House of Commons.

It must not for a moment be supposed, that we would contend for such absurd claims as those of Mr. Wentworth. We do nothing of the sort. But a law might easily have been passed which would set such claims aside, without overthrowing all the rights of property in the country.

The question has been mooted in our hearing—whether the confirmation of the Commissioner's Act by the Home Government or Parliament is constitutionally required before it can take effect. We will briefly state our views on the subject.

The Crown, doubtless, possesses certain prerogatives, among which one which it claims is to hold certain Colonies under its immediate control and management without the necessity of directly consulting Parliament in reference to any of its Acts. The Colony of New Zealand is one of these. And it is by virtue of this prerogative that the Crown has of its own will constituted this Colony a dependency of New South Wales itself a Crown Colony—and given the Governor and Council the power of legislating for it.

But the Crown is itself responsible to Parliament for all its proceedings, inasmuch as those proceedings may affect the inalienable rights of British subjects, and entail consequences of the most serious importance to the Nation at large. The Crown being itself intended for the national benefit, can have no prerogatives simply for itself, but in reference to that benefit, and therefore, in the exercise, necessary and undoubted prerogative, it is liable to be called in question by the three Legislative Estates of union, or by either of them, of which itself is one.

It necessarily follows from these premises, that every British subject, so long as