Page:The Tarankaki question.pdf/5

 "5. It is established, by a singular concurrence of the best evi- deuce, that the rules above-stated wore generally accepted and acted upon by the natives in respect of all the lands which a tribo inherited from its forefathers. Of course many cases must have existed in which might overtame right, still the true mule is known and understood : the natives have no difficulty in distinguishing between the cases in which land passed according to their custoin and those in which it weus taken by mere force."* It is usual for writers on Ethics to treat of what are called s natural rights," meaning thereby the duty and obligation which resku upou every man to treat his neighbour as he would be treated himself, with that sense of justice which is implanted in the breast of every human being by Him who made of oue blood all nations of the earth, and fashioncd their hearts alike : and which, however obliterated by that selfislıness and cruelty which reign in the dark places of the earth, requires only to be brought fairly before the inind even of the cost ignorant savage in order to command his assent. the Meade, kas to life, liberty, and property; and in this sense Sir W. Martin's rules and observations inight be accepted without comment. But hun conduit this is not the sense in which the words used will be understood by labassin by the generality of readers, or by those statesmen whose business it'e cowocaleteshin will be to consider the obligations created by the Treaty of Wai- tangi upon the justice and good faith of the British Government, hindi, In these remarks we have only to do with the rights of Pro- perty, as they are necessarily understood by jurists and states- mon, implying corresponding obligations to respect guch rights. In this sense I do not hesitate to say that so far as we can trace their history, there is no evidence of the New Zcalanders ever having possessod any rights, with the exception of those which there won hun were created by the Treaty of Waitangit Of what use is it, prate law-eattest tically, for a man to say I possess a right to my property, when there is no law to define the obigations which are created by such hzori ulenga posing it to have existed ? New Zealand was, in an emphatic out. sensc, a country without a law and without a prince. It is doubt- ful whether the Now Zcalander, until he witnessed tho exercise of authority under the British Government, possessed any idea cor- responding to that which is conveyed to our minds by the word "authority." Their only law was that of the strong arm. "When a strong inan armed kept his palace his goods were in peace, but when a stronger than he came upon him, and overcame him, he the end te weith thing care
 * Pages 1 to 5.