THE ENGLISH PRESS ON NEW ZEALAND.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume I, Issue 22, 28 November 1861, Page 6 (Supplement)

THE ENGLISH PRESS ON NEW ZEALAND.

(From the Sou them Cross, Nov. 5.) The London press has again favoured New Zealand with a notice, and wonderful to relate the Tones and Saturday Merieio have agreed to forget old feuds, and united their forces for a combined attack bn us unfortunate colonists.

good people at home appear to be impressed with the idea that a sanguinary war is racing in New Zealand at the present moment. We are happy to be in a position to assure them such is not the case, and that possibly the strong position taken up by the British Goverment, com” bined with a wise system of reform may be means of preventing the renewal of hostilities in thecolony. In the meanwhile, however, it appears to be the high and mighty pleasure of the leaders of public

opinion io the mother country to endeavour, as much as lies in their power, to lower the character of the settlers of New Zealand in the eyes of the world, andthe periodicals which we have mentioned seem to be striving which shall outdo the other m so praiseworthy an undertaking. The line of argument—if argument it can be called—attempted in reference to “ the interminable little war,” as the Review calls it both by that paper and the Times, appears to be this. Firstly to beg the question of the justice or unjustice of the war ; secondly to show what an expensive thing a war in New Zealand must be ; and then to sum up with a homily on the wickedness and atrocity of entering upon an unjust war—if it does not pay. This is really the whole train of reasoning. They seem to forget that if the war is unjust the question of expense is apart from the argument, unless possibly they hold with those who can forgive doings in China which they would never forgive in this country, and adopted as their maxim that “ loot and tribute cover a multitude of sins.” If, on the other hand, the war is a just one we really cannot understand why we are the only part of the British empire not entitled to protection, though it may be expensive to afford us such a luxury. But at all events the manner in which our London contemporaries jumble up considerations of expense and abstract justice is amusiug in the extreme.

Tax-payers in England, or rather those who pretend to fight their battles in the columns of the press, are always assuming that the connection between the colonies and the mother country is maintained entirely at the expense and risk of the latter. They point to a war in New Zealand, and exclaim—“VV r e have to pay for it.” Well, there is no doubt that they have to pay something when we are in trouble out here, but they quite forget this little fact that when they have “ big wars ” in Europe, we not only have to suffer directly in pocket , but run the risk of losing life and property into the bargain. A European war might extend to the Waitemata, and French cannon may some day be knocking our housses about our ears in Auckland, but the Waikatos are not likely to invade the Isle ot W ight, or burn down homesteads in Devonshire. We are involved deeply and personally in every European quarrel, and when the Saturday Review a few years’ back did its utmost to goad Louis Napoleon into declaring war, much anxiety was felt in the colonies, not exactly about “ butchers’ and bakers’ bills” as the Times has it, or because the addition of one or two pence to the income tax might prevent school education, but because the colonies were in the position of forlorn outposts easily surrounded and taken, and men felt their defenceless state, exposed to destruction through no fault of their own, and in a quarrel which concerned-them quite as little as the Waitara dispute does the \ orkshire ploughman. Ihe Times tells us that “ war is not in itself unpopular.” Judging by the reckless manner in which Great Britain plunged into the Crimean war, and the warlike enthusiasm of the non-combatants who remained at home, it is possibly not unpopular where its horrors are unknown ; and from a business point of view, war is likely to be highly appreciated in “ Printing-house-square,” and amongst the staff of special correspondents attached to the mighty thundercr there—so long as no French Zouaves have a chance of making their way into those sacred precincts,—but we can assure the Times that war is very unpopular “m itself” in New Zealand, even amongst those who fully recognize its necessity, and who cheerfully submit to all the losses and risks which it entails, a fact which Mr. Russell would soon discover were he to pay a visit to Taranaki and enquire amongst the militia and volunteers of that province. Waris unpopular in New Zealand, but, notwithstanding, men would rather see it, than sec Europeans ruined and natives rotting in a degraded state of lawless communism. 1

The spirit of that part of the English press from which we have been quoting, is unmistakeable. They care as little for the native race as they do for their fellow-countrymen here, and judging by their arguments, would not deign to notice New Zealand if the natives were being exterminated without any expense to the mother country ; but as matters stand they must notice it, for really the country cannot afford these little wars. They are afraid of Great Britain ruining itself by paying off little debts. They wish to keep their resources for paying off creditors who may become troublesome. .England, they say, spent so many millions on the great Crimean banquet given for the inter-, tainmeut of Louis Napoleon that she really cannot afford anything to the colonies. British blood and treasure were intended, they say, to bo poured out like water for holy places in the East, and not dribbled away for the protection of the pioneers of civilization, even in the places where we do not allow them to protect themselves. The Times is right; war is not unpopular in England; but it must be a brilliant war, with Emperors and Czars involved, not a commonplace stupid affair for the protection of life and property, and the maintenance of law and order.

We trust that the English press will desist from making any more of these virulent attacks on New Zealand colonists, the more so as we may assure the writers that they gain no credit for originality hy them, but are merely regarded here as the mouth pieces of a section which hare been sufficiently exposed both in the colonies and in the British parliament.