THE WAR IN SAMOA.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2644, 10 April 1894, Page 3

THE WAR IN SAMOA.

The Hew Zealand Herald’s Samoan correspondent says under date March 27th:—It is now reported that the Aana rebels who had retreated to Satapaala have returned to the first position they had at Faloasin and have again entrenched themselves. The overtures of peace made by the Government at the request of the Cousuls will only be accepted by Aana conditionally on the rebels being allowed to retain their arms and ammunition. It is not likely that thr Government will make this concession, and as it is morally certain that the rebels will persist in retaining their guns, the efforts to restore peace will be futile. It seems to be understood by both parties that active hostilities are to be resumed next week, when the rebel position at Faleasin will be again attacked. Atua has openly avowed its intention of coming to Apia ostensibly as a neutral force if fighting continues. Should this intention be carried out very serious trouble will inevitably ensue, as it is certain to eventuate in a rupture with the Tuamasaga. There was a cry raised last night, shortly after twelve o’clock that Mulinun was about to be attacked. A man came running from the seat of Government along the streets of Apia, crying out that Atua boats were approaching Mulinun with warlike intentions. In a few minutes the whole town was alive with Tuamasaga warriors rushing down to the peninsula to meet an attack. Drums even were beaten and bugles blowing in all directions. The excitement was intense for more than an hour, and then it became evident that that also was a false alarm. It has transpired that on the evening of the day on which the first encounter in the preseut war took place Chief Justice Ide addressed a fono or council of Samoan Chiefs, reminding them that, althongh a law had been passed prohibiting decapitation in warfare, yet, in defiance of the law, heads had been taken that day. He would sooner or later see that the offenders were arras'ed and punished by the Supreme Court. Mr R. L. Stevenson defends both the ordinance and the conduct of the Chief Justice, but many persons consider the law a mischievous one, and the address of the Chief Justice as a most extraordinary one for a person occupying a judicial position, and as likely also to do much practical harm.