THE NEW ZEALAND ADVERTISER, AND BAY OF ISLANDS GAZETTE.

KORORAREKA:—November 5, 1840.

FOR SALE,

BY the Undersigned, on board the ship Tuscan, at Russell:—

• Fine salt, pale and strong ale
• Real Jamaica Rum, 5 o. p., in barrels
• Rum in hhds., o. p.
• Square gin in tierces
• Tobacco in tierces, kegs, baskets and bales
• Sugar in loaves and mats
• Rice, preserved meats, pickles
• Ladies’, gentlemen’s and racing saddles
• Large bowl pipes
• Double barrel guns
• Gin in iron cases
• Tents, linen and twilled
• Spades, axes and tomahawks.

ANDERSON, SCOTT & Co.
Sept. 3rd.

TO BUILDERS, &c.

GENTLEMEN engaged in Building will save all per cent. by giving him orders, and stating the lengths and dimensions to suit their buildings, to the undersigned, who can supply timber to any extent.

BLACK & GREEN.
Opposite Russell.
Sept. 2nd, 1840.

Sir George Gipps has, some way or other, succeeded in procuring to himself, extensively, among that portion of his fellow subjects whom he has been appointed to preside, a very bad opinion either of his capacity to govern or his attachment to the essential principles of the British Constitution. The Port Phillip papers, even when opposed to each other, unite in condemning, nay, even, in reprobating, various particulars of his conduct with regard to them. The Sydney papers likewise, pretty well maintain them to divide the whole for there is scarcely a score of the Governor’s (for in fact the Council is the Governor, and vice versa) which one or the other of the public journals does not utterly disapprove. The general feeling maintained is, that New South Wales was never, commercially speaking, in such a state as it is at present. The Sydney Gazette takes the Act for New Zealand as one prominent among the very few, which reflect honor on the Governor, passed during the last session. This one he praises in the most unqualified manner. Others affecting the interests of Sydney, he treats with unlimited severity. Altogether, the conclusion to which we are necessarily led, is, that Sir George has not yet arrived at the art of successfully governing that he is only a school boy in legislation and honorary and, perhaps, a clever one—clever, one mean, in untieing orations, but altogether destitute of that mature and practical judgment which ought to be possessed prior to the assumption of office.

The above is the most charitable judgment which can be formed of the matter. The fact is undoubted, and is admitted by all, that Sir George has admirably succeeded in undermining the various interests committed to his care. It would be well, for his own sake, to hope, that nothing but ignorance and inexperience were the cause of his errors. But is there not strong evidence of something wrong in his intentions that his plans have been laid to accomplish an effort averse to the natural rights of uncontaminated British subjects? With all the commendations bestowed on the Council’s Act at Sydney, we take the liberty of thinking, it would more become the Administration of a Strafford aimed to establish, for another Charles the First, an absolute domination, than that of a servant of the Ministry of a liberal and enlightened Queen, controlled by a Reformed Parliament, in an age of the most unbounded triumph of public opinion. Instead of tending for ever as a monarchy of his wisdom, it will most certainly, if not colonially rescinded by him, hold over his memory to an infamy, which other acts of policy will not retrieve.

We declare our conviction—and every man who looks at the Act or considers its bearings—that conviction becomes stronger—that considered as a piece of Legislation for public welfare, it is only characterized by folly and as a decree of power; it is most cruel and wicked. We say that: "an agitation to private men’s that which is public is matter of public sentiment," a series of letters of which we have this day published one, on the Act itself, particulars are pointed out and we have already so repeatedly referred to the subject, that it is not now so necessary.

We may say, however, that we must lose our senses before we can ever be brought to approve or acquiesce in that which is so entirely repugnant to every notion that we have ever formed of that which is right.

We do not believe that there is any fear that Sir George will induce the present race of Colonists in New Zealand to become quiescent in his censure, unlike for more equivocal form of injustice which would have better answered his purpose. His stroke is too bold for Englishmen in the nineteenth century to submit to. His authority might have remained unquestioned if his policy had been more moderate, and only a few passing murmurs might be heard in the breeze. But the authority is now questioned; for our own part we utterly deny that the Act is legal, or that he is legally competent to execute it.

But though, on account of some few local or more general mitigations, the Colonists of this country and we at large should sink into a state of repose, we are pledged by the sacredness of our principles, never to rest, till the Act be demolished for ever. Whether here or in England, or elsewhere, so long as we can wield a pen or utter a word, we will maintain that the rights of native property, are the same as those of the most exalted subject of the British crown, and that they are as inviolable as the decrees of eternal truth. Men may be foreigners, but they are men. They may be uncivilized but they are yet men. They may be savages, only they still are men. One nation may oppress another, but its rights it cannot destroy. The most debased savage is a man, and the natural rights of man are universally the same. Property is a natural right and land is included in it and that right is not diminished or altered by the particular use to which that property is devoted—no other nation can plausibly have a right to touch that property without the free and intelligent consent of the owner.

With regard to the measures of Sir George Gipps’s Administration which may have justly called forth the repudiation of particular classes of the communities of New South Wales and Australia Felix it would not be for his altitude to them. They are numerous. Still it must be remarked, that those measures, taken singly, operate only partially. Some interests are injured, while, possibly, others may be promoted. But, alas for poor New Zealand, there is no single measure affecting the welfare of a particular portion of her community of which she has to complain. We might urge that there is no department of public matters settled, and that we see not what it will be. We might find fault with the whole of the department, with the uncertain usage of our Magistracy, with the undue discharge of prisoners committed for trial, with the infliction of penalties for the evasion of Licences, when Licences do not in fact exist, and at an instance of a common infamy, while no court yet exists competent to enforce the payment of just debts with the utter neglect of Kororareka in the immediate delivery of Mails from the ships anchoring in her own Harbour, though, she is the principal place of business, while Mails are carried a distance of several miles to be opened. Nor less might we complain of the fact, that within the last four or five months, parties whom we know have written to Van Diemen’s Land six times, and paid the postage charged, and that not one of their letters has ever reached its destination. And, finally, to state of no more, although the instances of the neglect with which this colony has been treated, are innumerable, the unfixedness of the Government itself, and its utter want of all the apparatus to carry on operations, might be a matter of censure. All these things have been entirely overlooked by Sir George Gipps and, in the meantime, a Bill has been passed to comprehend every mischief within itself, and to render the benefits of either and partial measures—not contingent—but impossible. What would the good people of Port Phillip or Sydney have said if they had been treated as we have?

At Taiamai, on Friday morning, 23rd October, during the absence of Mr. G. T. Palmer, his kitchen and store was burnt to the ground, but owing to the great exertions of the Natives the fire was extinguished, or the dwelling-house must also have been levelled. The damage done is estimated at sixty pounds. We are informed that rice (common) sold for 6d. and good for 8d. per lb., by the bag. Flour £28 10s. down to £26 per ton, the other day at Weston & Co.’s sale.

The Anna Watson we understand, is sold for the sum of £800.

Original Correspondence.

To the Editor of the New Zealand Advertiser and Bay of Islands Gazette.

SIR,—I avail myself of the columns of your valuable Paper, to make few remarks on the Bill relative to Grants of Land in New Zealand, passed by the Governor and Council of New South Wales, which affects so deeply the interests of Settlers of whatever denomination, in New Zealand.

I think I cannot do better, in order to place this Bill, in its proper light, than take each of its clauses seriatim, and thus expose to the well deserved execration of the public, the framing of this precious piece of legislation, and the weakness of the Council of New South Wales in adopting measures, too certainly entailing guilt and misery alike on the ruler and the community entrusted to them. The first thought that strikes the mind on a perusal of this Bill is, that it must have been prepared by a person inimical to one party or person connected with New Zealand. I am confirmed in this opinion by the party spirit that pervades it in fact, it appears as an Act passed by the Governor and Legislative Council of New South Wales against the interests of Mr. Wentworth and one or two other individuals, thereby disregarding the main object they were called upon to legislate for, namely the interests of all connected with New Zealand.

In the preamble to the notice is taken of the recognition of the independence of New Zealand, notwithstanding Captain HOBSON was at the very time this Bill was under the consideration of the Council, sending emissaries to all parts of Northern Island, to obtain...