WELLINGTON.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume XI, Issue 1295, 10 March 1883, Page 2

WELLINGTON.

M KOOTZ AGITATION. Let the people of New Zealand be as just, generous, and merciful, as the horrible deaths of those massacred at Poverty Bay and Mohaka warrant, and that justice remain at rest only till Te Kooti is brought to trial ; and if Ministers take no heed, memorialise Her Majesty the Queen and the British Parliament, for a baser deed than the granting of Te Kooti a pardon under the smuggled Amnesty Act never disgraced the actions of any Ministry on record throughout all ages. Are the people of the Poverty Bay District to be again placed at the mercy of such a relentless scoundrel as Te Kooti, without any appeal ? The craftiness and cunning of Government and Te Kooti are alike, and are without a precedent or parallel! Let all Nations know that the greater proportion of the populace of New Zealand will not remain satisfied till theyhave hurled from their seats of power the conniving members of the present Ministerial land jobbers, who disgrace the name of humanity and outrage all sense of justice and right for the sake of their own sordid ends, and who for the same cause condoned the abominable creatures' offences. They know full well after this disgraceful compact and combination, that their days of ministry (!) are numbered; therefore, they seize the day and make all things secure that they may ultimately reap the advantages ana benefits of their baneful intrigues and devices. Men who can so far abuse their power are little, if st all removed from the Te Kooti stamp when their main object is avarice, which is to be obtained only at the expense and sacrifice of the lives of their fellow creatures. Compare their actions with regard to young Longhurst and Te Kooti, and then read the following letter from the Parent of the incarcerated and grievously abused lad; then let the world judge for themselves, and say whether the public funds have not been misapplied. " Straining at a gcat and swallowing a camel ” exemplified! Oppressing the innocent, whilst crime in its worst and di'rsrf form runs rampant. Some hardened natures call To Kooti's pardon a " nine days wonder," but reasonable beings cannot rest when remembering the kind and amiable natures of some of the men and women whose bodies were so ruthlessly, savagely, and abominably violated; the harrowing scene is for ever recurring in its loathsome details, and it will be forever fresh in its gore and unrelenting savagery. Words cannot reproduce it in its truly horrible and intensely disgusting colours, and all time will not erase it—neither will the pardon and all its grovelling and truculent surroundings. 0 TEsrroßA! 0 Mobes ! THE LONGHURST CASE. TO THE EDITOR OF THE "POST.” Sir: I have just had my attention called to “ Parent's " letter in last Wednesday’s paper. I quite agree with him that the public mind should be accurately informed on the matter, and what ashe has written is untrue you will perhaps permit a little space. He says, “ If Adams had been defended by counsel when he was indicted for conspircy he assurdly would not not have been convicted.” I thought it was well-known the Government had taken the very unusual step of specially retaining a leading counsel on behalf of Adams and his daughter and paid counsel close on £lOO for his appearance at the R. M. and Supreme Courts, and that, notwithstanding this extraordinary effort on the part of the Crown to bolster up a conviction coupled with the whole force of the police and Crown Prosecuter, a jury after two day’s patient investigation unanimously declared my son innocent. It is also untrue that my son was convicted on the evidence of Dr. Gillon and Dr. Driver. He was convicted solely on the evidence (afterwards shewn to be false) of Adams and his I wife and daughter. Dr. Gillon on his first examination of the child, could not discover any of the symptoms that were apparent to him and Dr. Driver three days later, and it was not until Dr. Collins and I myself had told I

Adilffls that hh story ffluel be undid* from the dhild, that the suspicious marks tad Itaeration appeared. All this is how plain, and yet my son is in gaol tad the person whom a jury convicted of the concoction of this diabolical conspircy is st large, because the person he was convicted of conspiring with a child six months too young to be legally a criminal. I am, Ac.; LoNGHt'BST’S pAhxiri. Wellington, 28th Febrqary, 188 t.