Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

The Globe. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 1877.

The Maori " sticking-up " case is the latest sensational item of native news, and the occurrence is far from creditible to those concerned. It appears that a Maori who had committed some outrage at the Opunaki Hotel, was given into custody, and put in the

lock-up till he could be sent into New Plymouth. He was accordingly handcuffed, and in charge of a constable, was placed in the coach, but as it was rumoured that a rescue was intended, two mounted constables were ordered to accompany the coach on horseback. According to the correspondent of a Wellington contemporary, these constables were certainly not sent for protection, because neither they nor the one in charge of the prisoner were armed. When the coach arrived at Harriet Beach, about thirty natives met it, a few stopping the horses, the others assisting the prisoner to escape. " It would have been useless," says the Taranahi Herald, " on the part of the constabularly to have shown any greater resistance than they did, for they were outnumbered by the Natives and loss of life might have resulted. The Natives however are known, and on some future day when at ilawera or in town will be arrested and punished for this daring act in broad daylight." The whole affair appears to have, to say the least of it, been a very stupid piece of business. If the authorities really were informed that a rescue would be attempted, why were precautions not taken to prevent this glaring degredatiou of authority on the part of the Maoris ? Why was the prisoner taken through thirty miles of rebel country, when it was known that an attempt would be made to rescue him? It almost looks as if this contempt of the law was courted. If, on the other hand, they wanted to let him go, he should never have been arrested at all. " What adds to the humiliation of the occurrence," says a contemporary, " is the circumstance that the prisoner himself, soon after the coach started, cooly informed the constables of the exact spot where the rescue would be made, and the result verified his words." In reply to a question on the subject, the other night, the Government said " that the matter was in the hands of the Civil Commissioner of the district to deal with." " This means," a contemporary points out, " that nothing whatever will be done, and that the natives, encouraged by immunity from punishment, willbecomemore audacious and law-defying than ever! " If every precaution had been taken to prevent such an occurrence, then had it happened notwithstanding, it might have been well to have let the minor crime pass unpunished for the present, rather than stir up bloodshed. But the case under notice does not belong to tin's class. The prisoner was arrested, and the authorities were informed that an attempt would be made to rescue him, and yet they court it by sending the man in charge of an unarmed constable, and guarded by two others in the same position. To quote the language of the correspondent already referred to, " that the whole business has been performed in a manner likely to impress on the public and the Parliament the necessity of continuing the Native OiKce and the Constabulary, the number of people depending on native difficulties will bear amply testimony."

Some days ago we called attention to the provisions of the Canterbury Public Domains Amendment Bill, and strongly urged opposition to it. We are glad to notice that the question has been discussed in the City Council, and that it has been resolved to call a public meeting to consider it. It is one in which the public of Christchurch are deeply interested. As we have already pointed out, the Domain Board, if the Bill becomes law, will have power to exclude the public on certain clays, not only from Hagley Park but from the Domain itself, except on the payment of an entrance fee It is extremely undesirable that such a power should be granted to any public body. We hope, therefore, that his Worship the Mayor will take immediate steps to have the meeting called, and that the ratepayers will not hesitate to express in unmistakeable terms their opinion on this attempt to curtail the unrestricted use of the public reserves. [Since the above was in type we observe that his Worship has called a public meeting for Friday evening.]

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GLOBE18770925.2.6

Bibliographic details

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 1014, 25 September 1877, Page 2

Word Count
742

The Globe. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 1877. Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 1014, 25 September 1877, Page 2

The Globe. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 1877. Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 1014, 25 September 1877, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert