WELLINGTON ACCEPTANCES

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2094, 21 January 1908, Page 3

WELLIN GTON ACCEPTANCES

Press Association

• WELLINGTON, Jan. 20. The following are the acceptances iortlio Second day of the Wellington -,faceting;— Mungnroa Hack Welter.—Martyrimu. Suttee, King Post, Libyan, Playmate, Sen Situ, Ataahua, Bine Bell, Ari'sis, Aneyele.

Jilnuury Hnmlaoup.—Aeolus, .Medallist, Chat tom*, .AYilliam, Swimming Belt, Aauxlo, Prism. Poneke Hack Handicap.—Culmination, Lochieht, l L'liantluis, Strut Rosa leer, Tui toko. Racing Club Handicap.—Gold Crest , King Billy, Moloch. A pa. Sir Tristram, San Julie, Mystification, Aeolus, Tnnghnouna. Clauoha t tan, Knrawaka, Saga. Fity.herhert Handicap. --Befengaria, Diabolo. Chantmw. St-par it; Passive.

Met ro]H)litan Hand'eap. Full Rate, All Rod, Gawaitt, Moriarty, Petrovna, Ballarat, Tupono, l)e Witte, Mon Ami, Aboriginal, Chamois. IVneirrow Hack Handicap.—Waikar.tka. Rniigipapa, Suttee, North Head, Truganui, Miss A’era, Yosanii, l.ueret ins, Diplomatic, Advantage, I'a'tik:.

Wei 1 ington St a kcs.—t irnvi ta t ion, Diabolo. Fleet-foot, Armlet, Finery] Sir Artegil, Aborigine

KEIR HARDIE'S INDIAN SPEECHES.

WHAT HE ACTUALLY DID SAY

BLAMES i 1 IE CAJiLE AGENT

Air. Keir liardie, though he had previously refused to he lira wit about India, saw lit, on the eve of his departure from the Dominion, to ituiao some explanations in that regud. It- had tieen said tlpU he had uitlul'niwu or explained away It is objectionable statements, but, lie said, lie was not in the h-ibit of speaking till his mind was made up, and, having .spoken, he was not m the habit of withdrawing what he had said., He would continue to say at Home that- when the conditions were understood the British people for very shame would take up the cause and redress the' -wrongs of the Indian people. What -lie objected to about the New Zealand Press was not that it- had published wrong i abatements, but that when the' truth was known it had neither withdrawn nor apologised, as , the Anglo-Indian papers had done. Mr. Hardie denied that he had ever said the things alleged, aiul blatued Reuter’s agent for cabling Home a sensational and untrue report. Four of the live Anglo-Indian papers in Calcutta proved that the agent had iird in his report. Mr. Keir Hardie, in making his ..-x pi illation about his doings in lua, said -lie had hoped to he. taxed v some of those who had been writng to the papers about his sayings mil doings in India. He had reused point blank to be drawn by lie newspapers into dealing with in- Indian question, lie confessed, lowever, that on the eve of bis deuiture from New Zealand ho ion Id not have regretted the opporunity of making a statement, and lependod upon some of the valiant ■cities in the Press being present to ive him the opportunity. A more ■atieut or more loyal people than he people of India did not exist on lie face of the globe. There was no edition and no rebellion in India, he so-called unrest had its origin n good and sufficient cause, and .lien that cause was removed agitaion subsided. In Delhi in April last ear. the Alunicipal Council had ecu'fit to double the municipal rate, uid the ratepayers began to hold neetings of protest-. It was called rebellion, and the Press cabled Home reports that the people of vere preparing for another mutiny iiicl another massacre of Europeans m the night of the 10th of May, .be anniversary of the outbreak of lie great mutiny of 1851. There had, been -a quarrel between some navvies and a contractor who would .-.ot pay them their wages. They gave* him a sound drubbing, and lie disgorged the wages. Tile statement he was giving was what he received from the British District Magistrate in Delhi. A half-runken Eurasian •aw the squabble, 'andas a result of his tale told in the European i -quarter that the natives had broken loose to massacre, and that aleady seven Englishmen had been •tabbed to death, the military were allied out, -anil all the houses were barricaded with,, the-single exception ,f the -residence of the Magistrate, who had seen tho whole affair m the native quarter. Business went on as -usual. Nevertheless, the Press cabled that the natives had murdered seven Englishmen, and a general massacre had only been prevented by tho prompt calling out ot “lie troops. Tho double tax - was dvortly afterwards withdrawn, and the agitation ; nbsided. That was a sample of what was called sedition in India. If' -that was. sedition, there was a gi od deal of it not far away. For the twenty-five years ho had'.been in public life he bad never -ought to deft nd his actions. If a man’s life-work was not its own defence he must be in -a very bad wgv is*deed.’ He never replied to Press criticisms. He had arrived in Calcutta on September 16, and spent •ight days in Eastern Bengal; then returning to Calcutta. About the Ist or 2nd of October he was received n Calcutta by the Landlords’ Association and -by the Loyal British An-'do-Indian Association. On- the morning of the 3rd or 4th -the people in Calcutta, were considerably u-1 prised to read in their papers hat tho Precs of England was in a into of frenzv at his doings in East•rn Bengal. " He made inquiries, mil found that Reuter’s agent had •allied home -a sensational, untrue, ■ nil concocted iopart, and four of the ive Anglo-Indian papers proved that i-he mail had lb din his report. They called upon- him to produce his proof, and he failed, and they charg'd him with deliberate falsifying of he report. On the strength of that ,'alse report .and altogether ignoring correct reports sent Home by four >ther Anglo-Indian papers, the Press if New Zealand and a section of the Press of London seemed to got into i frenssied condition. Every day hroughont hie tour ' through India he was visiting tile English officials, l'jiev had liot heard of -his seditious movements. At Simla he was received by the Governor, -and was the guest of three separate members of Hie Government-. If one-thousandth part of what lad appeared m the papers had been true, would those officials, from Hie Governor downwards, have seen a man, dined with ■i man. and feasted a man who had l,opu guiltv of . noli conduct? When lie had used a certain expression about the editors of the New Zealand Press he had in his mind not that they had unwittingly and unknowingly published wrong statements but that when they got . to know the trillh they neither withdrew those statements nor apologised. The editors of the Anglo-Indian papers, acting as one would expect iron tlemen to'act, had frankly withdrawn their statements and apologised for having made them.