Original Correspondence

New Zealander, Volume 10, Issue 879, 16 September 1854, Page 3

Original Correspondence

MR. WAKEFIELD AND THE PENSIONER SETTLEMENTS. To the Editor of the New Zealander. Sir, —May I beg that you will allow ine room in your columns, to notice a cunning and unfair quotation in the Southern Cross, of the 12th Inst., from a pamphlet written by me in the year 1851, with respect to the Pensioner Settlements. The E liter of that paper says, in his leading article : “The name of the hon. member far I lie Ilutt having been mentioned during the course of the debate in connexion with the Pensioner Settlements, we lake this opportunity of reprinting the following passage from a pamphlet written by Mr. E. J. Wakefield." Then follows the quotation; hy which itappears that, at the time when I wrote the pamphlet, I had gathered an opinion from the reports of many eye-witnesses, that the Pensioner Settlements had been very far from beneficial to New Zealand ; and that, about the same time, I had haen told by a olorgyman who had sojourned in one of their’villages, that they ‘-did nothing but beg and drink.”

The fact is that, at that time, now three years ao-o, 1 really had formed such au opinion, in consequence of testimony of various kinds to that effect, whether hy word of mouth or in print, which had reached me. I remember especially, that the columns of the Southern Cross newspaper were, during the period of the first foundation of those, settlements, in 1848, and 1849, constantly filled with statement calculated to make a stranger at a distance form such an opinion as that which 1 expressed. But I must hog the particular attention of your readers to the following circumstances : The writer in the Southern Cross mentions “ the Hon. Member for the Hutt,” who is my father (Mr. Edward Gibbon Wakefield), in connexion with the Pensioner Settlements, and without further remark quotes from a pamphlet written by me. He thus leaves it for the reader who is not careful, to think that my father wrote the pamphlet. The fact is, my father was in England when I wrote it, and he did not even see it till many mouths afterwards.

The writer in the Southern Cross carefully avoids saying when, where, or under what circumstances 1 wrote the pamphlet containing the quotation alluded to, or what was the subject of the pamphlet itself. He thus leaves the reader who is not careful, to conclude that my father has been lately writing against the character ot the Pensioners.

I am not aware that my father ever wrote about them at all. 1 wrote this pamphlet at Canterbury three years ago, to defend that settlement from an attack made upon it by Sir George Grey, in the Legislative Council at U elUngton, as a “ class” settlement. And in the course of that defence, T replied to Ins attack on our “class” settlements in the South, by saying, that 1 had been informed that the Government had founded “ class” settlements in the North whicn were unsuccessful. I never was at Auckland till the end of last May. 1 have been too busy since that time to go and sec the Pensioner Settlements for myself. Hut 1 feel bound to acknowledge that, during my stay in Auckland, having had the opportunity of conversing on the subject with many of the best informed inhabitants of the Province, and especially with Major Greenwood, the able representative of the Pensioner Settlements, I now believe them to have proved eminently successful, and to have added very largely by their industry to the wealth and prosperity of the Province. As I am about to return to Canterbury in a day or two, and shall therefore be unable to visit the Pensioner Settlements, 1 am anxious to take this opportunity of removing any impression which the artful and partial statement of the Cross mav have produced among the Pensioners, that either my father or I have been writing in order to injure their character. 1 remain, Sir, Your obedient servant, E. Jern ingham Wakefield. Auckland, Sept. 15. To the Editor of the New Zealander. Sin. —The Editor of the Southern Cross is at present a Myth, a sort of Cock-lane ghost, who when it becomes convenient that private character shall be assailed, is called upon by his keeper to make “ revelations,” and having given the on dit required, glides back to Tartaros or “another place.” I was not surprised to hear the hon. and learned member for the Bay of islands declare, in his place in the House, with indignant emphasis, that he was not the editor of the Southern Cross. I apprehend, Sir, that there are few men in this community with any remains of sclf-respect-( that article of which an hon. member for this City has himself so small a stock remaining that he is obliged to be very careful of it) —-who would accept, with all the traditions of falsehood, virulence, and calumny which attach to it, the post of Editor of the Southern Cross. The last unfortunate whom fate compelled to

bear that title, has been lately sent forth into the wilderness with all the sins of the Proprietary upon his head, and with but a small amount public respect or sympathy to console him under his sense of wrongs. 1 was not, therefore, as I have said, surprised to hear the lion, and learned member for the Bav of Islands declare, in his place, that he was not the editorial scape-goat of the Proprietor of the Cross , and lam glad to think that the hon. member was able, with a clear, logical, perception of the truth, to make that assertion, tor I hold the hon. member in high cs imation. But, Bir, there is an on dit that if not tha Editor, he is at least the “ redacteur" of tint Journal. This w a “ Gallicism,” the meaning of which the hon. member for the Onmta District would no doubt, if called upon, render for tin hon. gentleman from the North. 1 hope, Sir, the on dit has as much truth as other on dits of which we know-: for myself, I can only say that I don’t believe it—quite. Lara, &c., A Working Settler.

To the Editor of the New-Zealander. N1 k. Editor, —Allow me to trespass on a small portion of your valuable space, for the purpose of exposing some of the incongruous theories of electoral qualifications propounded in the House of Representatives on Friday evening last by tha Caliban of literature, Hugh Carletou, Esq. When the Longinus of tlie “ Southern Cross” occasionally tries to improve our taste bv a “ flagon of Falernian” drawn from the Sabine cellars of Horace, we can pardon his pedantry while we laugh at his sesquipedalian jaw-breakers. But when men whose legislative renown promises to he so ephemeral presume to define the qualifications on which the exercise of our fran cliisc mav bo made to depend, I think it becomes high time to warn the public against the dangerous innovations which some of our legislative busy bodies are so eager to see introduced. Tho great critic will remember the fable of Phooton who was rash enough to assume the guidance of the solar chariot for a day and set the world on fire before night, or he may call to mind the conduct of that ambitious Greek madman who set fire to the temple of Diana for the purpose of transmitting his name to posterity. He would make wealth or intelligence the test of elegibility to vote, forgetting that the most illustrious patriots of Great Britain and Ireland have died poor, some of them so very poor as to have been buried at the public expense. When wealth happens to he in the possession of men of enlarged minds and benevolent dispositions it will always secure its owners that political greatness which its proper employment deserves ; hut when on the contrary it falls into the hands of some selfish churl, That’s to the poor like ony whunstane And ha’ds their noses to the grunstane, it becomes the cause of unmitigated evil—it is in such hands doled out to corrupt the public virtue of the working classes, it is as dangerous to the liberties of the people as the wooden horse was to Troy. Titneo Danaos etdonaferentes I fear tlie Greeks even giving present*. And philanthropists such as Metoikos & Co., who have given such unequivocal proofs of their hostility to every measure originated to improve the condition of (he less affluent portion of New Zealand society will he heard in future with that distrust for which their illiberal policy has distinguished them. Mr. C. is liberal enough to Include intellectual wealth in his erudite prospectus of disfranchisement. What amount of literary acumen would he compel a man to possess before he could vote! M ould he compel him to’submit his attainments to a hoard of schoolmasters ? Or would he endeavour in tho manner of his patron by a phrenological survey of the exterior of the pericranium to guess at the probable amount of the wisdom imide. It appears to me Mr. Editor that Her Majesty’s Ministers formed too high an estimate of most of the statesmen to whom they have delegated lha welfare of Her Majesty’s subjects in this homUphero,

<■ To everything a man mint serve a trade Hut statesmen! —statesmen all are ready made!" It was faxing the loyalty of the people too much, it has saddled them with all (lie expenses of self-government, without any of its benefits, to open a senate for the aggrandisement of men who have now proved themselves so unworthy of such distinction. Well may we say to our rulers in the language of Burns, But I’m afraid my mi’hty sire Veve trusted ministration. To eh tps wha in a barn or byre Had better filled their station. To day the Session will probably terminate, and what answer will the majority he able to give to their too credulous constituencies. They have frittered away their time, some like Mctoikos in shewing their learning, and others in shewing their want of it. Mr. Carletou speaks most exultingly of the facilities the people of New Zealand possess for educating their children. The reverse is however the case. The youth ot this colony labour under greater disabilities than their European forefathers, scattered and isolated as they are in the bush they find it difficult to concentrate themselves for the purpose ot- employing teachers or establishing schools. Sometimes a few may try to raise the means of employing a schoolmaster, and after they have subscribed to the amount of their means they find themselves divided in their opinion respecting the character or qualifications of those they wish to employ. Everj community in this colony is constituted of individuals teaching different formulas of the Christian religion, and any person who would attempt to force a system or education on them that would be acceptable to all had better consult the Macenas of Greek tlij celebrated City Member whose religion and politics seem to he all comprised in the one commandment. Tahe care of thyself \ Anti Oligarch. To the Editor of the New-Ze ALAND ER. Mr. Editor, —I was present in the gallery of the House of Representatives' on Saturday evening, when Air. E. O. Wakefield defended himself against his traducers and libellers. I heard the member ibr the Hay of Islands denounce him as a man who would attack any one and every one, “even those standing higher than myself if that were possible,” for these 1 believe to be his very words. And what was my astonishment after all this virtuous indignation against a man aft idling others; to hear this Bombsistes Furioso justify the malignant libel in the Southern Cross by the specious and contemptible quibble that it was merely stated as an on dit of the day. Well did Mr. \\ akefield state that if this species of warfare were allowed no character however pure, would be safe and no one could he made responsible for their vile acts, if (hey could get off by stating that it was the (fn dit of the day. 1 have observed that if Mr. Wakefield a tack others, here it is openly to tlu r 1 faces. He does not stab in the dark. The debate of S tturday night will I trust clearly shew the species of assassm-likc attacks ot the Southern Cross, which will also open their eyes to the character of all connected with that paper —not that the member for the Bay of Islands has anything to do with that paper—of course not , for k' says so—But sir, every man finds his own level in time, and I think this hon. gentleman’s display of himself on last Saturday night will do much to fix his gradient line, —1 am, &c., Candour. Auckland, 12th September, 1851. Hugh s'Jys he Edits not, —abjures the Ci-o*»— Giving wise Willie’s Print the scornful toss. For “ moral turpitude,” Will Gibbon cuts. For moral truth, frUfitith in Hugh he puts; — Were not the world here tum-ed lopsy Uirvy Folks might pronounce one Will's decisions scurry.— UgOItVY.