purporting to a cession of that independence to the British Crown. It is quite unnecessary for me to enter more fully into that subject, as your late numbers have most satisfactorily and ably established the fact of that independence. It is laid down in the preamble to the Act, "That whereas it is expedient and proper to put beyond doubt the invalidity of all Titles to Land within the said Islands of New Zealand, founded upon such purchases or pretended gifts, conveyances or pretended conveyances, or other title from the said uncivilised Tribes or Aboriginal inhabitants of New Zealand;"

This requires some explanation. On the introduction of the Bill into the Council it was worded differently. "And whereas neither the Chiefs, nor other individuals of uncivilized people, such as inhabit the Islands of New Zealand, have or can have a right to dispose of the Territory occupied by them, as to convey to individuals not forming part of their own tribes, and not being Aboriginal Inhabitants of such Territory, a permanent interest in the lands, or in any portion of the lands which are held by them in common, and for the advantage of the said tribes or Aboriginal inhabitants."—But it being foreseen that part of this language would be liable to severe stricture, and would place the Act itself in jeopardy, the verbal denial of the Native right to sell has been withdrawn, while the denial of their power to sell is continued, thus retaining all the essential venom of the measure, in the very act of disguising its bitterness. In fact, the language ought to have been retained, for it expresses the very thing which the Bill was intended by its framer to express, and which it does even now, on close examination, convey to the mind.—Now, if such an implication might be applied to the Aboriginal population of New South Wales, and the savages of some other countries, yet it would be the height of injustice and untruth to apply them to the Aborigines of New Zealand. To us who are daily witnesses of the industry and labour they bestow on their potatoe and kumera grounds, their inordinate desire and avidity to acquire knowledge, and the degree of civilization they have already attained, such assertion appear rather too ridiculous, and we should be induced to attribute them to ignorance and want of proper and correct information, did we not see reason to be satisfied, that they were prepared with deeper and more sinister motives, that of giving a plausible plea to one of the most atrocious acts of wholesale robbery, that any despot has ever attempted. Good God! to what a low state have those noble feelings of Liberty and the sacredness of property fallen!

Will our friends in Great Britain believe, that a body of Englishmen have listened with composure and assented without murmur, to a measure, to be equalled only by the inquisitorial policy of a Court of Spain, a measure, by which their Countrymen are ruined and beggared? But these statements carry their own condemnation, and go far to confound the whole train of brilliant but empty sophistry, displayed by Sir George Gipps in his speech in the Council. It brings to light the web of error and ignorance which he spread round the Council, the more effectually to entangle them in his toils; and we imagine that he never expected that the exposition which he intended to have been the master-piece whereon to rest the provisions of his Bill, should be found to be a cruel and false libel on the character of the New Zealanders. We beg to inform Sir George Gipps that the Mauries are not the uncivilized and wandering Tribes of no settled habitation and pursuits in life, which he represents, but on the contrary, each Tribe has its separate District, on which they have their permanent abode. And that, therefore, they do not come within the description given of them by him in the Preamble to his Bill, and that by his own argument; they are possessed of Land, according to his admission, by the very best of all titles, that of making it subservient by their labour to their daily sustenance.

Although in the preamble there is no assertion of the right of the British Crown to all Lands bought by Europeans or others in New Zealand, previous to the Proclamations issued by Captain Hobson, yet, from the whole tenor of its contents, it may be easily collected. In order to comprehend the nature of this doctrine, we must refer to its origin. We find on looking over the History of England, that it dates its existence only from the accession of William the Conqueror, and that it was unknown amongst the Saxons, at which time Lands were held by allodium, (which all Writers explain to be every man’s own land, which he possesseth merely in his own right, without owning any rent or service to any superior. [Blackstone, chapter 102, page 105.] And that it was one of those tinued strokes of policy, which this Norman King on pretence of defending the kingdom against the Danes, adopted, to keep his Saxon subjects in subjection, it met with ready acquiescence, as it carried with it an appearance of being made for the public good; its object being to provide a proper and efficient force for the defence of the State. But the Crown soon the power thus given to up, by using it only as a means of replenishing its empty coffers, by the most cruel and vexatious proceedings. Our ancestors for centuries smarted under the burthens they had thus voluntarily imposed upon themselves; and, at last, irritated beyond control, they threw off the yoke, and reduced this doctrine to its present limited meaning. At present no real benefit accrues from it to the crown, other than that the crown for the convenience of the public, becomes the nominal source from whence all Titles to Lands are derived, and the known party to succeed to estates to which there are no real representatives, and to those escheated by the crimes of their possessors.

We may, therefore, safely affirm, that the real power of the crown has been totally misunderstood or willingly misinterpreted; and it is truly pitiable, that Sir George Gipps, in a country free from the absurd trammels of feudal tenures, (no other resource or pretext to spoliation of property being found) should have recourse to a doctrine, which is neither acknowledged nor recognized in the country whence it is stated to have emanated, in any other light than as a public convenience.

Having once established the fact, that the crown is only the nominal source from whence all Titles to Land are derived, it cannot by any possible argument have reference to any country which her Majesty’s predecessors, as well as herself, have solemnly declared and recognized as independent of the crown; and if it is at all acted upon in New Zealand, it can only relate to such lands as may be purchased by her Majesty under the right of preemption reserved to the crown by the treaty of cession already alluded to, if, indeed, there be such a Treaty; and, further, the crown by such cession becomes de facto, the representative of the Independent Chiefs, and is, therefore, bound, by every tie of justice, honor and good faith, to confirm all grants and sales of land made by them, previous to such cession, and becoming also virtually precisely what the Native Chiefs were by their former sovereignty, and by the customs of the Mauries, the nominal source from which such grants and purchases are derived. And this must have been their own views, since it is, if we are not mistaken, particularly agreed to by them in the Treaty above supposed, that for the future no lands shall be sold to any private individual. But shall be reserved to be purchased by the crown. The second and third clauses refer to the appointment of the Commissioners, and the oaths they are to take.

I shall beg permission to trouble you with a continuation of these remarks next week. In the mean time, I am, Sir, your’s, &c., Civis.

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

I despair of seeing Police matters better conducted under the present system. Why is a man allowed to continue in the Police for a single day, who, last night, together with his wife, was in such a shameful state of intoxication, as to excite disorder sufficient to alarm the whole neighbourhood, and to be led off to the watch-house? Why should the better portion of the police be under the necessity of watching over disorders arising in their own body, as well as those of the public? Why should a man appointed to be Chief Constable, be allowed to keep a house open to the public, frequently the greater part of the night, and to have gaming, in various forms, frequently on his premises? Why, indeed, contrary to the practice in other Colonies, should he be allowed to keep a public house at all, thereby depriving the public of one-half of his services, and neutralizing the other by the necessity he may be under of allowing the interference it is his own duty to check? And why should he be permitted to involve himself in such a concern, so as to incur the possibility of contracting debts on its account, he may not always readily discharge, and thus expose himself to the disgrace of being sued in a Court of Requests, as soon as one shall be established? The system which allows such things is wrong, and must be changed.—Your’s, Sir, Observer. Nov. 4.

[We have heard that the man above alluded to, and another, have been since discharged. Ed.]

Shipping Intelligence.

ARRIVED,
Oct. 29.—H. M. B. Britomart, from the Thames.
30.—Brig Teresa, Captain Fish, from Tuleahuna, South America, and Tahiti, with flour.
Nov. 1.—Ranger Revenue Cutter from the Waitemata, with His Excellency the Lieutenant Governor on board.
1.—Brig Caroline, Captain Woodin, from Hobart Town, with merchandize and passengers.
2.—Anna Watson, Captain Stewart, from the Thames.

SAILED,
Oct. 28.—The Platina for Hokianga.
Nov. 4.—H. M. B. Britomart for Sydney.
5.—This day, the Ranger Revenue cutter for Sydney. The Anna Watson for Sydney, is expected to sail in a few days.

Passengers per Caroline from Hobart Town
Cabin—Captain England, of her M. 12th regt., Mr. & Mrs. Day and child, Richard Radcliffe and Frederick Manning, Esqrs. Steerage—Mr. & Mrs. Guirllay, Mr. & Mrs. O’Neil, Mr. & Mrs. Makepeace, Mr. & Mrs. Coombes and child, Mr. & Mrs. Ross, Messrs. Heath, Sawyer, Gibbs, M’Cormack & Son, Hunter, and William Stevenson; a Native Wesleyan Preacher.

By the brig Caroline we have received Files of 'Murray’s Review,' the 'Colonial Times,' 'Courier,' 'Hobart Town Advertiser' and 'True Colonist' to the 13th instant.

Kororarcka: Printed by G. A. Eagar & Co.