MR. HARRY WRIGG AND THE NEW ZEALAND CROSS,

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1585, 31 October 1912, Page 5

MR. HARRY WRIGG AND THE NEW ZEALAND CROSS,

■Sir,—l trust that you will allow me to answer Mr. Harry Wrigg's letter, which appeared' in your issue ,of October 20, as it is an unjustifiablo attack on many brave men, since passed away, who petitioned tho House for tho. recall of the New Zealand Cross, presented by tho Mayor of Auckland somo fourteen years since, to Mr. Wrigg. In tho letter under discussion, Mr. Wrigg makes several statements that he should know aro not correct. He states that "on the eve of a third Parliamentary inquiry," etc., into tho circumstances that led up to his "obtaining this decoration," etc. Mr. Wrigg should know full well that there has been only'ono inquiry, that of August 8, 1899, when the committee set up by the House, after spending seven days and examining somo twenty witnesses, reported:—"That Mr. Harry Wrigg was not entitled to the New Zealand Cross." This was such a blow to tho Seddon. Cabinet that Mr. Seddon .immediately ordered the report to bo "referred back," but as it was afterwards found that there was no possible chance of any committee of the Houso reporting differently,' the Government instead blocked the publication, and not until the Ward Ministry came into office were its contents public property. The holders of tho New* Zealand Cross and others have on two occasions petitioned the House "to givo effect to the committee's report" (which is an entirely different thing to Parliamentary inquiries), but the WardSeddon element wisely never allowed the report to be discussed in tho House. Mr. Wrigg complained that he had not had sufficient timo to procure certain (witnesses to .establish his claim to the Cross hence the committee's _ scathing report. Apparently Mr. Wrigg is "under tho impression that it is tho 6oldier s duty to obtain evidence from among his friends, and make (os he did) a personal application for any decoration no may consider himself entitled to receive. If this gentleman will peruse the Act, under which tho order of tho New Zealand Cross was inaugurated, ho will see "that a personal application" must debar a man from receiving it, and then it imperatively states: "That any recommendation for the New Zealand Cross MUST come from the commanding officer, or the officer next in charge ONLY."- Colonel St. John and Major Ma/ir wero the officers on tho occasion on which Mr. Wrigg lays claim to his "historic heroism"; therefore they wero the only men who had tho power to recommend Mr. Wrigg for the decoration. If Jlr. Wrigg, a3 he asserts, had performed any act of bravery, theso officers and his fellow-troopers would have known of it, and the act must have been recorded in the dispatches of the day. Why was not Mr. Wrigg's name ever favourably mentioned' in"ally' of'theso dispatches? Why did not Colonel St. John (who was on most friendly terms with Mr. Wrigg for several years after tho war) recommend him for'the Cress Why did not' Major Mair recommend him ? And why did Mr. Wrigg (who should be conversant on theso matters) apply to and obtain from a "rank outsider" a recommendation which ho must have known from a military standpoint was of no more valile • than a recommendation obtained from his family grocer? It was quite immaterial (as far as the Government were concerncd) whether Mr. Wrigg'was at Opotiki or not in 1867, or whether the Cross was presented for winning a "long-distance raco," a "long-time piano competition," or for "personal bfavery." Mr. Wrigg: petitioned for it, and the Government, ignoring all the regulations attached to the "Order of tho Cross," presented it. _ All the above circumstances are -explained, and questions answered, in the 91 pages of printed evidence obtained by tho oomniittee from the officers, and from Mr. Wrigg's own fellow troopers of ISB7. ■ Whilo the evidence is such that no committee of the House could be formed who would leverse _ the opinion of the first, and only, committee that investigated the matter.- . Further on in his letter Mr. Wrigg writes that because "The Jving's_ Empire Veterans" had elected him their vicepresident, this should bo as "convincing proof" (hat ho was entitled to the New Zealand Cross. If Mr. Wrigg has used-all the specious arguments ivit.li tlio veterans, in question that have appeared in his letter under review, no wonder that theso confiding old soldiers accept. Mr. Wrigg at his own value, and regard him a.s a hero and a martyr. Would any of these men, however, retain for twenty-four hours a military decoration when his commanding officer, fellow comrades, and a committee of enquiry had reported that lie was not entitled to "it? All tho knowledge 1 have of Mr. Wrigg, Opotiki, or the war of 1867, I liavo gleaned from the committee's report of 1899, ond I strongly advise anyone interested in military matters to read this report, and then lo express his opinion on same, in tho only proper channel—tho press.— I am, etc., IM p EI!IAIj OFFICER.