Right to land property is of two kinds, National and Individual. Both are founded on Utility, that is, the advantage of mankind.

National or Government Right exists only where there is a presiding responsible government competent to treat with other governments, and to obey international law, and able to put down pirates and freebooters within the territory of the state. National or Government Right is evidently founded on the utility of government power, and of national responsibility. Individual Right, or appropriation of land, arises from actual occupancy of the lands, more especially cultivation by labour. Individual Right is founded on land being more advantageously employed and cultivated when divided and appropriated than when held in common, and on the claim which a person acquires to any article, not belonging to another, by expending his labour upon it. In some instances land has been cultivated in common by the tribe or district inhabitants, and sometimes the government has engrossed this right of property in land, and farmed it out in portions; but neither plan has been found to promote improvement so well as individual appropriation.

The natives of New Zealand themselves admit, and every stranger who has been amongst them corroborates the fact, that they are incapable of combining and forming any thing like a responsible government fitted to treat with other governments, and to observe international law, or even to maintain any proper government authority within the territory of New Zealand. They have, therefore, no national or government right to the New Zealand territory, and have only individual right to those parts which they cultivate or derive some benefit from by occupancy. A native of New Zealand has no right to the unappropriated wilderness of New Zealand more than any other person who may be standing beside him in that wilderness. But as the natives of New Zealand, in common with the natives of New South Wales and Tasmania, have got a sense of right to these unappropriated territories, it is well to purchase their good will to the occupancy of these,—that is, their forbearance from molesting the occupiers; because, to take possession without doing so might lead to the sacrifice of life, and because it is even cheaper to hire their forbearance than to compel it by force. Any one purchasing their good will to a portion of territory has no right, however, to that territory, further than not to be molested by the natives; and unless he himself has settled on the grounds, grazed them with stock or cultivated them—the quantity of ground bearing a reasonable proportion to his stock or means of cultivating—he has no right to prevent any individual from taking occupancy and cultivating, and thus becoming rightfully possessed of the same lands. Any one who has purchased the forbearance of the natives, and failed to occupy, and who out of revenge may instigate the natives against the person who does occupy, is manifestly guilty and answerable for the consequences. It is useless here to assert the right which the imperative necessity of an overflowing population gives to spread over and occupy the waste portions of the earth. This right has been acknowledged and acted upon in all ages; and the right to any territory, not having a population capable of forming a presiding responsible government, is recognised to belong to the nation which has first discovered and taken formal occupancy.

No Company in London can assume a government right over New Zealand, which, by first formal occupancy by Captain Cook, belongs of recognised right to the crown of Great Britain. Still less can this company receive any government right, or individual right, to lands in New Zealand from the natives, who, we have shewn, have no such rights to give, except in regard to the small portions which the natives have acquired individual right to by cultivation. The New Zealand Land Company in London have, indeed, the good sense to be aware of this,—that they can give no guarantee to the possession of the lands they are selling;—taking good care in their conveyance to the buyers to specify, “and the Company are not to be considered as guaranteeing the title except as against their own acts and the acts of those deriving title under and in trust for them.”

Any attempt of capitalists in London or elsewhere forming New Zealand Land Companies, to monopolize whole provinces of New Zealand, by purchasing the good will of the natives at a mere nominal price, ought, therefore, not to stand in the way of emigrants going out and occupying any of these lands which the London or Home Companies or their assignees may not have become possessed of by actual occupancy, that is, by the lands being apportioned amongst and occupied by settlers, in numbers something commensurate to the extent of grounds. The British Government and Legislature will surely look to this?[14]

To allow any company of home capitalists to monopolize the territory of New Zealand in this way, would be to subject the colonization of New Zealand to such a tax as the company might choose to lay upon it (at present L.1 per acre is the tax, minus such a portion of it as they may choose to expend upon carrying out emigrants, and the price they may pay for the good-will of the natives). This tax, or price of L.1 per acre, nearly four times the government price of land in the United States, by depriving the emigrant of his little capital, so very necessary to his success as a settler, will act as a great barrier to colonization, and prevent that fine country from becoming speedily of paramount value to Britain.[15]

Should the New Zealand Land Company of London capitalists go on purchasing the good-will of the lands they are selling only, and not attempt to engross or monopolize large portions of New Zealand, to the exclusion of emigrants who will not consent to pay to them their heavy monopoly price or tax, and if they shall employ 75 per cent. of the price they charge for the lands in fitting out colonizing expeditions, consisting of a proper assortment of emigrants, as they have done in the first instance, but which they refuse to go on doing; or, if they shall dispose of the lands at a price nearly equal to the government price of the United States for fresh lands, and not take to themselves beyond a fair interest for the capital they may lie out of, allotting the residue for the internal improvement of the colony (roads, bridges, &c.), and for civilizing and ameliorating the condition of the natives, their agency in promoting New Zealand colonization may be of very great utility, by giving confidence and security to emigrants. If this is the line they are to pursue, the Scots Company will do every thing they may have in their power to further the London Company’s objects, and will no doubt be met by the London Company in the same spirit. New Zealand will afford more than a sufficient field for the exertions of both.