Page 2 Advertisements Column 2

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XII, Issue 826, 4 February 1868, Page 2

say that I consider it equally creditable to my father’s character his having been honourably mentioned in Sir G. Grey|s public despatches, as I consider it complimentary to his son, his having been honourably mentioned in the Wellington Independent and Wanganui Times. There are those from whom abuse is considered simply as equivalent to a certificate of respectability. Sir, the editor says—“ And it may be hardly necessary to point out that Mr Williams’ letter merely enlarges on the old missionary cry to the Maori— ‘ Don’t trust the colonists, they will rob you.’ We cannot make this journal a medium of circulating such disloyal and seditious writings as Mr Williams expects us to print just to answer his purpose.” What I wrote was in answer to statements which appeared in the Times—not more seditious than the speeches of certain hon. members in 1860. My only “ purpose” is to trot out the truth , T would again remind the amiable editor of that free and independent Anglo-Saxon newspaper, the Wanganui Times. “ Experience teaches us that comprehensive inquiry by throwing light upon obscure and complicated questions, by confirming authentic facts, and by causing the truth to emerge from the shock of opinions and doctrines cannot fail to restore calm to men’s minds, while enlightening them.” He must know full well magna est veritas et prevalebit. Sir, in conclusion we all know that Great Britain is going to war with that amiable party, King Theodore, to avenge insults offered to her agents and subjects. The great men of this world generally avenge insults offered to their agents. There is a greater than Great Britain, a greater than the great men of this world. Have not those braye and good old men the Church Missionaries been held up to public execration as having been the cause of all the fighting and bloodshed in this country ? Has not every species of abuse been heaped upon them ? Let us await patiently the result, as the Maori has it—- “ Taihoa.” —l am, &c,, Thomas C. Williams, A Native of New Zealand.

Taita, Wellington, Jan. 7, 1368. TO THE EDITOR OP THE WANGANUI TIMES. Sir, -In your paper dated Dec. 24, which has been forwarded to me by post, is an article, (communicated). It commences asfollows —“A pamphlet on the Mana.vatu purchase, by Mr T. G. Williams, a native of New Zealand, has made its appearance rather out of season. At any season it would be an ill-advised and generally illnatured production ; but, just now, such a publication is not only totally uncalled for, but istpositively disloyal and seditious.” I trust that the writer was not in any way instrumental in keeping my pamphlet back from July to December —hve months. Does the writer fail to perceive, that, by having himself repeated all the unjust, stale, and iniquitous charges against the agents of the British Societies, charging them with having been the cause of all the troubles in this country, he has shewn that my pamphlet so far from being “ out of season ” is perfectly in season ; so far from being “ totally uncalled for,” is “totally” called for? I would also maintain that it is a very good- “ natured production/’ and that it is the reverse of “disloyal and seditious.” The writer says, “Mr Williams is apparently one of a class of-men in and out of the colony, who arrogate to themselves a pure and generous interest in the Maori race, but who have alike failed to obtain the confidence of the Maoris and of the colonists.” I do trust there is none of that sort of nonsense about me —nor do I care two straws about the “ confidence either of the Maoris or of the colonists.” Did 1 possess their confidence what should I do with it, how much a pound would it bring me at the Hutt market? The writer asks—“ What state of things is it Mr Williams would like to see in this country ? ” I am not aware that 1 have any particular wish in the matter. All I ask is that this Manawatu purchase should be thoroughly and fully investigated—not before judges whom that great man the Prime Minister of New Zealand is prepared to “ sweep away ” if they do anything contrary to the “ public interests,” but before British commissioners, gentlemen who so far from any danger of their being “ swept away” may find themselves in a position to “ sweep.” When that has been done I shall be in a position and prepared to sing iny “ nunc dimittis .” The writer says, “ When the grumbling i 3 taken up from east to west, from north to south—when the people becomes aware that a wrong has been done —then the wrong doers, be they who they may, fall, or to use a favourite expression of Mr Williams’ ‘ trot/ and new men, who it is hoped will do better, are put in their place.” This may be all very well when Europeans are concerned, but it never has been and never will be the case when Maoris and they alone are concerned. Let us apply it to Waitara. Did not the Ministry, and the majority of ! the Assembly distinctly refuse to investigate the Waitara “ wrong,” though pressed to do so by the representatives of Auckland, by Messrs Featherston, Fitzherbert, and Fox, by the Bishop of New Zealand, and the great majority of the Church Missionaries ? Let me ask the writer to look up the Auckland newspapers of that time and read the speeches of the members who voted with the Government. How many of the colonists troubled themselves to iuquire into the real merits of the case, though the general cry was for a “vigorousprosecution of the war,” and addresses were sent to the Governor from all parts of the colony expressing approval of the war ? The writer admits that the Waitara was a “ wrong.” Did the “wrong doers fall?” Did they have to “trot?” Where are they now? Where again are the Maoris ? Echo answers, “ Where ? ” The writer says “ dogmatical, yet complicated and mysterious as have been the proceedings of Maori policymongers, lay and clerical, there existed nevertheless, at the time of the Waitara dispute, and there still exists an authority sufficient, if to prevent open wrongdoing on the part of any functionaries whomsoever. That authority is the public opinion of the colonists as expressed by their representatives in Parliament assembled.” He answers himself a little lower down, thus —“Stiff-necked and bigoted as ever, the British Societies will not admit that it is the system that they themselves established and still maintain, that is wrong and rotten and absurd : that under such a system such episodes as the Waitara and the Manawatu disputesare inevitable, and that consequently the colonists are justified in refusing to interfere except by condemning the entire system, which, however, they have been unable as yet to sweep altogether away.” Should I suggest to your mild correspondent that next time he sits himself down in the presence of his looking-glass for the purpose of shaving, he should address himself tipis, ‘ Mr Communicator, you’re a muff.”