The Treaty of Waitangi; or, how New Zealand became a British ColonyBuick, Thomas Lindsay
History
The Treaty of Waitangi; or, how New Zealand became a British Colony
Buick, Thomas Lindsay
New Zealand -- Politics and government; Treaty of Waitangi (1840)
The Wesleyan Mission Society embodied their views in a memorial, which
they subsequently deemed worthy of publication,[188] wherein they
justified their right to question the propriety of Earl Grey's policy,
not only because of the prestige and influence of their Mission, but
because that prestige and influence had been solicited in the
interests of the Treaty of Waitangi by Captain Hobson, at a time when
his success without it was impossible. They explained that their
solicitude upon the subject had been greatly increased, if not wholly
produced by the flood of letters they had received from their
Missionaries in New Zealand, expressing the state of alarm into which
they had been thrown by the publication of his Lordship's Despatch and
Instructions, and which in their opinion affixed a meaning to the
Treaty of Waitangi very different from that in which it was understood
by the parties principally concerned in its execution. Being
apprehensive that any attempt to carry what they regarded as a new
interpretation of the treaty into effect, would result in the most
disastrous consequences, they were constrained to make such
representations upon the subject as they had reason to hope would
avert the evils which they feared. They then proceeded to set out that
at the commencement of the proceedings adopted by Her Majesty's
Government for founding a colony in New Zealand, they distinctly
understood that the previous recognition of the independence of New
Zealand by the British Government having taken the country out of the
category of barbarous tribes and people without a national character
or national rights, the ordinary course pursued in colonisation would
not be adopted in its case, but that New Zealand would be negotiated
with as an Independent State, and that the British Crown would not
take anything from the Aboriginal proprietors which was not ceded on
their part by fair and honourable treaty. In support of this view,
they quoted at length from Lord Normanby's instructions to Captain
Hobson, in 1839 and from the subsequent correspondence with him, when
that officer sought a greater amplification of important points. On
the authority, then, of the noble gentleman formerly at the head of
the Colonial Department, they claimed that they were not deceived when
they understood that the cession of sovereignty in New Zealand was not
to involve the surrender of territory, either in whole or in part;
that the cession to the Crown of such waste lands as might be
progressively required for the use of the settlers should be
subsequently obtained by fair and equal contracts with the natives,
and that no lands were to be claimed for the Crown in New Zealand,
except such as might be obtained by purchase from the natives, or by
their own free consent. They detailed the overtures which Captain
Hobson made to their Missionaries in 1840, when, "in accordance with
instructions he had received from the highest authority in the realm,"
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account