The Telephone. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. GISBORNE, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 1884. DISGRACEFUL CONDUCT.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume I, Issue 72, 21 February 1884, Page 2

The Telephone. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. GISBORNE, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 1884. DISGRACEFUL CONDUCT.

A case has been brought under the notice of the Auckland public lately which gives evidence of the perpetration of most disgraceful conduct on the part of European laborers, who “ struck," for the only reason that a Maori had been engaged to work with them. The case as set forth by a Mr. T. B. Hut runs thus:—“A Maori lad is lying sick in our Hospital, A days ago his father came to see him, and wanted to take him home. Dr. Bond considered it would be the cause of his death to remove him, and held out hopes of his recovery if he would remain. The lad wanted to see his mother, and the mother wanted to see her sou ; so, on the condition that his father and mother came to Auckland to stay and visit him cheered him up, and he consented to remain. The father asked me to get him work whilst he was here until his son could be removed. I explained the case to Mr. Kibbt, who at once acted the Good Samaritan, and said the Maori could come to work. He arrived last night, and commenced work this morning. To-night Mr. Kirby has been in, and told me that his men had struck work because he had employed this Maori.” We would fain believe th at the above extract does not clearly give the facts of the case ; but the assertions are borne out by the Auckland Herald, and there is no reason to question their authenticity. It may well be said, then, that the British spirit of fair-play did not actuate the apology for men who struck work on the occasion referred to, but that their want of charity and manly feeling proclaim those laborers to be unworthy the friendly attention of all right-thinking persons. What feeling can such men have, who refused to grant the solace of a father's and mother’s company to a poor sick lad—simply because the paternal parent is a Maori ? And, apart from the uncharitableness of the proceedings, by what right, we aek, do those disgraces to the British race seek to debar a Native from earning an honest livelihood in hie Native land ? Their employer is, however, a man of feeling and spirit, and determined not to be coerced into discharging the Maori, for the gratification of his evil-minded white laborers; so that, it is to be hoped, a lesson will be taught the would-be dictators which the roughs should not forget for some time to come. This case is really one of grave import,—it means this—are the Natives to be permitted to work harmoniously with the Europeans who have thought fit to make the country of the Maori their home ? Or will employers of labor permit the evil intentions of white laborers to debar them from doing what is simply an act of justice ? We trust that the good, manly example set by Mr. Kibbt will be followed by other employers of labor in this Colony, and that the white roughs will find it is not in their power to dictate to contractors what countrymen they shall engage to work for them. The case we refer to being one of a most brutal character, probably the employers of labor in Auckland will act unitedly in endeavoring to check the heartless propensities of those workmen who desired to prevent the Maori toiling near them, and it would be nothing but just punishment if the ruffianly would-be dictators found a difficulty in earning money for some time to come. They certainly cannot expect to claim the sympathy of the rightminded portion of our fellow-colonists, while the Maori laborer and his poor sick child will find many friends to wish them a speedy release from their troubles and prosperity in the future.