The Parihaka Volunteers.

Thames Star, Volume XIII, Issue 4273, 11 September 1882, Page 3

The Parihaka Volunteers.

'[By Telegraph.] ' . , • . (fbom otte own cobbesponbent.) "','.' „ ' Wellington, This day. In the House on Supply on the Esti-. mates being sought to be forced through, 1 ' Mr Bryce, proposed that the item " Pay, .Thames' 'Volunteers, recommended by Public Petitions Committee, £885," be : struck out. He argued that payment to the Thames corps would be giving them a, concession beyond that obtained by other corps who were.present at Parihaka, and would lead to many similar claims being made. Mr Dargayille. and others argued that ."'..the, mistaken parsimony shown in this . - respect would deter many good men from . volunteering again under similar circum- j -,-(. stances. - The Thames men had received an implied assuranoe of at least two '; months' pay, and it had not been given them, and they considered the Govern- ,, ment had broken faith. In this view the ,''Public ;-Petitions'Committee* had concurred. ' '<' Mr Fergus daid he:would vote for it if the other, c c prps, who had acted quite as •"'nobly''and'well as the Thames men were similarly deaU with. . . ' "l"! Major" Harris said many of the men had lost their employment through

volunteering, and others on the strength ,'." of the understanding that they would" get two! months'..service, Had employed sub- (- stitutes.to fill their places in tbe meantime ■I, and had thus to keep their engagements .it with them. ,-•.-• i,,!, c Mr, Bryce condemned, the mercenary a."'spirit 1 displayed by the Thames volunteers ti:'as"a, disgrace to the colony and the , >i'ser»iee... ■•"•■•"' iJ ' Mr, Whitaker objected to any such ? view beiDg held. He, as the '"'•' first volunteer sworn in on the Thames at "' the 1 time.'of the Poverty Bay massacre, ■'l;ha(i; always taken a great interest in the ', jbcal, corps, and be knew that a body of '. men,more, honorable never associated ' together. The insinuation made by the - Minister,of Defence that it was a bogus -,;: claim was a slander on them. The terms v of the engagement were explicit though the evidence was not before the House. His firm belief was . that the Thames men were engaged for two months certain, ■ and- it was for the House to consider how far ran honorable engagement extended, and to what extent it.-should,.be ratified. Mr Brvce had -reaped honor for his share in the Parihaka - expedition, and it was neither just nor generous to refuse to recognise the claims of those who shared with him in winnirig successMr Bryce replied he objected to treat the subject as a matter of mere generosity; it was not his own money that he had to deal with, but that of the colony. He had to approach'the subject from a just and equitable point of view. Mr Moss deprecated any mercenary motives being .imputed to the Thames Volunteers. Division List re Thames Volunteer Vote, struck, out by 30 to 26. Ayes: Atkinson, Barron, Beetham, Brown J. E., Bryce, DeLautour, Dodson, Fergus, Fulton, Green, Hall, Hursthouse, Johnston, Macandrew/ Mason, McMillan, Montgomery; Pearson. Holies ton, Seaton, Shephard, Sutter, Thomson, H. Thomson, Trimble, Watt, White, Williams, Wilson, Wright. Noes: Bracken, Brown J., C, Buchanan, Buchanan W.; Cadman, Daniel, Dafgaville, Feldwick, Fitzgerald, Harris, Hutchison, Johnston C:, Kelly; McKenzie E ( ;W., McDonald, Moss, Pyke, Seddon, She'ehan, Smith, Stewart, . Swanson, Taiairoa, Tawhai, Tolei Turnbull. < It was made a Government question.