The Evening Star SATURDAY, APRIL 16, 1870.

Evening Star, Volume VIII, Issue 2166, 16 April 1870, Page 2

The Evening Star SATURDAY, APRIL 16, 1870.

The Daily Times made a notable discovery on Thursday, which became the occasion of rejoicing in a special paragraph devoted to exultation. It was found out that for once the editorial staff had guessed rightly, and that E.Opata’s victory was after all, no very great success, for the prisoners taken were not Te Kootians, but captives liberated durance. The tone assumed by our weak minded contemporary is not creditable either to the journal or the Province. It is more reprehensible than Mr Cutten’s, for that gentleman has an interest in view, in seeking to disguise his true opinions and he may therefore be excused if he appeals to the uneducated and prejudiced in language that has the appearance of straightforwardness, but which none who have the gift of understanding English will characterise otherwise than as “ bunkum.” This morning the Daily Times publishes a telegram that tells of the real position of affairs, and shews that the rebellion is virtually over; that the victory is even more decisive than could have been anticipated ; and that Te Kooti is, what any sensible man must have foreseen, almost forsaken, driven from his resting place, without men, without ammunition, without food, without prestige. One would have thought that very shame would have silenced detraction —that, at any rate, thei’e would have been candid rejoicing at the improved prospect of North Island affairs, and that there would, at least, have been some outward show of decency in its attacks upon the Ministry. But no; —no matter how successfully Native affairs may have been conducted, there must be some drawback to them. This morning, on the same page with the contradiction to its own jubilant paragraph of yesterday, is another article containing an elaborate estimate of the cost of the war. We do not care to go to the trouble of exposing its fallacy further than by stating that notwithstanding its parade of figures, every one of them is based upon the opinion of an anonymous “ own correspondent ” in the North, who, in all probability, has not equal means with the editor of the Daily Times of ascertaining the truth. On such a frail basis our contemporary has the hardihood to build a hypothesis that, in all probability, will prove to be as false as it is rash. He cannot deny the success that has attended the Native policy of the present Government, Had it been achieved during Mr Stafford’s administration, no doubt it would have been admitted, probably with amplifications. But the men at the head of affah’S do not suit our contemporary, and consequently with him victory is only ideal, and expense is doubled or trebled. Perhaps we attach too much importance to these misrepresentations, and imagine they may be more baneful on the public mind than they really are. It may be that, if we estimated the influence of our contemporary upon public opinion at its correct value, we should discover it to be so small, that the interests of truth would be equally served by silence as by drawing attention to his fallacies. At any rate, by pointing out the questionable sources of his information, we pay him the compliment of imagining that some may be misled by his flippant conclusions. But we will put it another way, and ask the public to look on both sides of the question. As we have no reliable data with regard to the war expenditure of

the Fox Ministry, and as we have reliable data respecting that of the Stafford administration, even comparing the imaginary cost stated by the Daily Times with the real cost incurred by Mr Stafford’s Ministry, the balance is largely in favor of the former. At the time that Mr Stafford left office, the expenditure of the country was <£40,000 per month, with a prospect of increasing Another loan was talked of for war purposes; and from the style of dealing with Native affairs, it is more than probable that at this very time, instead of having to deal with some twenty enemies, who have no resting-place, but who are hunted from place to place as dangerous beasts at large, we might have been at war with half the Maori race. Now surely that change of policy that has pi’evented these results should at least be free from censure, and the saving acknowledged by every candid mind. It must be remembered that this change has been effected, too, without the compromise of principle — without truckling. Why then should we be asked to revert back to a Ministry through whose culpable neglect the war was protracted, whose plans were not adapted to the exigency of the occasion, and who left a crop of difficulties behind them, financial and administrative, that have been so successfully overcome by their successors. There is no argument so potent as success. The Daily Times may allow Colonel Whitmore, or some interested Northern correspondent the use of its columns for political purposes. So far as correspondence is concerned, such statements would go for what they were worth ■ but when on such slippery grounds it is sought to bias public opinion, the interests of truth require that such unwarrantable inferences should be opposed.