WAKEFIELD.

Press, Volume LXII, Issue 18659, 7 April 1926, Page 8

WAKEFIELD.

HIS METHODS AND MOTIVES CRITICISMS ANSWERED. "We have received the following communication from Dr. A. J. Harrop, writing from London on February 12th:— In an otherwise admirable series of articles contributed to the Anniversary Number of "The Press 1 ' on December 12th—a number which aroused a great deal of interest in England—Mr C. E. Carringtou includes one which purports to give the life story of Edward Gibbon Wakefield. The amazing career of Wakefield—the story of his life from Newgate to New Zealand —and the astonishing influence he exerted in his time, all lend themselves to dramatic treatment, and it is easy, by generalising from the most striking, if perhaps not the most important facts, to produce a life of Wakefield very readable in itself, but very far astray in its interpretation of the guiding motives of the founder of New Zealand.

For three years I have been engaged in writing an account of the history of New Zealand from the original documents stored in the Public Eecords Office. These include all the correspondence and minute-books of the New Zealand Company, and naturally shed a flood of light on Wakefield's methods and motives. Whether Mr Carrington has searched theso documents I do not definitely know, but judging from his article I should think it unlikely. Before giving my own interpretation of Wakefield's motives, it will be as well to state those parts of Mr Carrington's account which appear to mc to be open to question.

Did Not Die Rich. First of all, let us consider the following two sentences: — "The father was always in financial trouble, from which tho sous escaped by strange expedients. Edward Gibbon Wakefield, though he practised no profession, died worth £90,000, of which the origin is hard to discover."

The origin of Mr Carrington's information on this subject is even harder to discover, and it is regrettable that he has not mentioned if. The passage has caused great pain to the relatives of Edward Gibbon Wakefield in England, and his niece, Miss Prances Torlesse, characterises it, in a letter I received from her yesterday, as a monstrous misstatement. "I doubt," she writes, "if E.G.W. died worth 90,000 farthings." Even assuming that,Mr Carrington's figure is correct, the passage is still very objectionable, for it 'makes an obvious innuendo without offering any evidence to support it. The Implication is that Wakefield amassed a fortune by dishonest presumably that his public work was but a cover to his private greed. As far as tho founding of Now Zealand is concorned, it may be stated without qualification that Wakefield exhausted both himself and hifl money in his long struggle to build in the southern seas a colony which should prove to tho world that colonisation might be made an almost exact science. Ho spent much money in the cause, and declined to accept any. remuneration for his endeavours. He realised, it is true, that continued opposition on the part of the Colonial Office might force the Now Zealand Company to become a mere nibuey-making concern, but when that event occurred he soon separated from the Company, and expressed, perhaps in stronger terms, than the occasion warranted, his contempt for men who had sold their principles for pounds, shillings, and pence. That Wakefield was ambitious may be conceded, but that he was avaricious in his schemes of colonisation certainly requires more proof than is contained in the article under reyiew. "Placed Among the Great." The second passage we may consider is: "His young wife, to whom he was passionately devoted, brought him a fortune and two children. Her death in 1820 plunged him into 'modish' despair." Now nothing can be more certain than the fact that Wakefield's despair at the loss of his wife was very real—and it may be regarded as the turning-point in his life. To say that Wakefield died "hated, despised, and obscure" is true only ii\ a restricted sense. He was hated, perhaps, by the colonial politicians to whom he was opposed. In colonial politics, he used to say, politicians struck at each other's hearts. He was despised, perhaps, by lofty-minded people blessed with ideals. But Wakefield also had ideals —and, as Mr Carrington conceded, he made his dreams come true. He was obscure, perhaps, when he died. But many of the world's greatest men have retired into obscurity when their work was done. If, in one way, he was hated, despised, and obscure, in another he was loved, honoured, and placed, among the great. . Mrs Freeman, his niece, who attended him in his last years, still speaks with affection of the statesman ,who throughout his life was a lover of children. In England," where the career of Wakefield could be more impartially viewed than in New Zealand, where it was complicated by local jealousies, groat men realised that in Wakefield the world had seen one of the greatest practical philanthropists of his age. Was he an enthusiast, or only a company promoter, making a fortune* asks Mr Carrington. Perhaps the best answer to this rhetorical question is the fact that the New Zealand Company was only founded when tho New Zealand Association failed to pass the Colonial Office censorship.

And a Suggestion. Wakefield was the true founder of Canterbury as well as Wellington, Nelson, New Plymouth, and Otago. Without Wakefield, there would have been no movement to attract John Robert Godley. The Church of, England scheme was not one' of the later, but one of the earlier of Wakefield's conceptions. The site was to have been Wairarapa, not Canterbury, but the idea was the same.

To me it is a strange thing that New Zealand has done so little to perpetuate the memory of the man who founded the colony, and whose work secures for New Zealand a permanent place in all histories dealing with the growth of colonial self-government.. In the Colonial Office in Downing street, there is a memorial to Wakefield, with an inscription telling of his work. Surely New Zealand might well repair an omission by at last recognising adequately the services of its founder. To my mind, something in the realm of ideas—a permanent travelling scholarship awarded at intervals, or a prize endowed in the memory of Wakefield—would be .more appropriate than a monument in marble. If the Canterbury College Board of Governors or the New Zealand Historical Association wero to take the matter up with the Government, I have no' doubt that something could be done. There would be considerable support from people in this country. Then, at last, the reproach might be removed, that Wakefield has no adequate honour in what is essentially his own country. ..."