NOT ESSENTIALLY DISHONEST

Gisborne Times, Volume LXV, Issue 10308, 18 January 1927, Page 5

NOT ESSENTIALLY DISHONEST

According to the speaTcer, __ it was a mistake to. suppose that the Maori was essentially dishonest. • He was not always Tionest, but there were some pakehas who were also not tionest! It was sad to remember indeed that the pakehas had assisted not a little to promote dishonesty in tho Maori. He would mention in that regard a case that had happened in the early days in the Wairarapa. There there was a storekeeper who did a lot of trade in flour, sugar, etc., with the Maoris. The Maoris would come along and see a bag of, say, flour. They would ask what it was worth and would be told so much per pound. Then they would ask the storekeeper how many pppnds were in tho bag. The Maoris thought the storekeeper very kind and just in allowing them to weigh the flour on the steelyards but they did not know' tnat three or lour Teet or bullock chain which the storekeeper had dishonestly attached to his weighing machine told against the buyer! The storekeeper got away with his dishonesty for a long time but eventually the Maoris found out and, naturally, they tried to get even. Thus it came about that the Maori had got a lot of his dishonesty from the pakeha. MAORIS AND LIQUOR.

There was another thing which the Archdeacon felt he should touch upon concerning the Maoris. It was this: a lot of people thought the Maoris wbre far ioo addicted to liquor. Well again he wanted to combat that. He didn’t think that all round the Maoris drank harder than the pakehas. It was also an extraordinary tiring that when a Maori who was a “hard goer” reformed, he turned down drink for good. In that the Maori appeared to be the superior of the prtkelia. There had once been an old chief m Hawke’s Bay who had been a “hard goer” Being a chief, the rank and tile liad naturally followed his example and the pa had become notorious. _ In order to bring about a better state of affairs the chief decided that if anybody came home drunk on a Saturday night lie would be fined £l, for a second offence £5 and for a third £25; And the chief constituted himself the Court and heard all cases on the Monday morning. But. alas, in due course the chief himself offended and the following Monday he asked from “the Bench” if there were any offenders. His own name was read out by the “hobby.” Addressing himself the old chief had asked himself what sort of an example to his tribe -lie considered himself. It was a disgraceful thing that a chief like himself had offended. What could he expect of the other fellows? and so on! Then lie duly fined himself £l, paid the fine, and adjourned the Court! it so happened that within a month the old chief again offended. On that occasion in the Court he had addressed himself in these words: “What, you here again! I thought I gave you a pretty good lesson last time. It doesn’t seem to have done you much good, etc.’’ Then he fined himself £5. But they never caught him again! Years afterwards this chief was Tying very ill and a doctor liad advised a little brandy but the old fellow had said that lie had had plenty of.brandy in his time and it had often made him drunk. He would not have any more as lie did not want to die drunk. That, said the Archdeacon, showed how genuine had been the reformation. He also instanced the case of a well-known Poverty Bay chief who in his early life had drunk to excess but in his latter years had proved as sober as a judge. A Maori could put a thing like that absolutely behind him; in that he had ail advantage over the pakeha.

SPORTSMANSHIP IN CRIME. Continuing, the speaker referred to the light in which the Maori referred to committal to gaol in contrast with how such a measure was viewed by the pakeha. Personally he was proud to call his friends numbers of Maoris who had been guests of His Majesty. The pakeha had the unfortunate habit of attaching a stigma to a person who had had to serve a sentence. Not so the Maori; he never referred to anyone as having been a gaol-bird. A Maori bore no resentment if he were sent to gaol. He simply said: “I had a go at it; I got left, I have been punished; .1 will make a fresh start.” His friends looked on the matter in the same, light.. More often than not, too, a Maori was never caught again for a similar offence. Thev should ask a gaoler what he thought of Maoris as prisoners. would tell them that Maoris were the best prisoners that came under thennotice. They looked on their sentence philosophically and would say that they had known the rules and had broken them. Therefore they had do put un with their punishment, uhy the Maori made such a good prisoner was -that he was, above everything, a good sport; Knowing he had broken the rules he knew that punishment might be expected.

A LOVER OF FAIR FIGHTING

The Archdeacon said that just as in the past the Maori had entered vigorously into war so to-day lus descendants thoroughly enjoyed football. If the Maori went down he bore no resentment, hut he liked fair play. There were, of course, in connection with the records of the brushes with the Maoris in the early clays suggestions that they had played low. down tricks. But it did not follow that their side of the matter was properly apprehended. Let them take the case of the Wairau massacre. It had still to be proved that the Maoris did anything wrong prior to the incident which led up to that tragedy. It seemed to him that our people had previously been playing the fool. Hie Maori loved to fight for fighting s sake. A retired sea captain who lived among the Maoris had told him that during a tribal war lie liad happened to visit a pa belonging to one -of the parties. There he saw a Maori from another part of the country. Asked why he was there he had said he had relatives in the tribe and he must help them in their hour of ti la . During the following week the old captain had visited the other side and to his astonishment he had seen his Maori friend there also. Questioned on the strangeness of the position the Maori had said that he .had relatives on that side too! Their sportsman sliin in their wars with the Biitisii was a matter well-known to all.

“WHY NOT HAVE A FIGHT?” Prior to the sacking of Kororareka (Russell), the Maoris, m I&H>, on • assembling bet ore the tow nship, had sent word that they intended to launch their attack the next morning and advising the settlers to get their women and children a wav. But that was not alll. They had even assisted to remove them by boats and on the*way down the street had looted shops in order to provide the children with sweets. Proceeding, the Archdeacon gave other instances of how the Maori had merely lodging in the defences. We could take such a poll by direct assault hut such a step usually proved, expensive and nothing was gained for the Maoris simply skipped to anOthe similar ?*■: <Dienx.it decided to engage in sapping .under covpr _ot fascines made into a huge; roller

(Continued at foot of next column.)