Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

The Pamphlet Collection of Sir Robert Stout: Volume 76

Freedom of Thoughts Speech in New Zealand

Front Cover

page break

Freedom of Thoughts Speech in New Zealand.

Printed at the City Printing Coy (Wright & Grenside), FitzGerald's Avenue, Willis Street, Wellington, April 2, 1900.

page break
page break

Preface.

To The New Zealand Public.

I See by this morning's "New Zealand Times" that the Premier has thought fit and proper to make public in the Dunedin Star portions of the correspondence which has passed between himself and me concerning my views as a Journalist upon the Transvaal War.

This most extraordinary and unexpected action on the part of the Premier relieves me from observing longer silence on the subject; indeed it becomes necessary that I should be heard in self-defence.

Taking events in the order of their occurrence, it is incumbent upon me to devote some attention to the doings of the "Dunedin Star" man, and the active part he has taken in the matters disclosed by the correspondence.

Not content with reproducing my article from the "New York Times," the "Dunedin Star" man assailed me in the coarsest and most vindictive terms—in language which one might expect from some ignorant and infuriated fish-fag, or from that Dublin virago whom the great Daniel O'Connell once wagered to enrage and then subdue by the vocabulary of mathematics. In fact, if I had been at the mercy of this ferocious man in Bond Street, there is no doubt I should have been in the shoes of the rollicking hero in "Maritana"—"ordered to be shot at seven." But like Don Caesar de Bazan in his time, I escaped that shocking penalty in mine, and am still in the bosom of my friends. As it was, he could only urge upon the Government the necessity of visiting me with that punishment which was beyond his own power to inflict, and apparently nothing but my immediate dismissal would satisfy him. His persistency was shown in a way which the following little narrative sufficiently illustrates. A few days after his tirade in the "Star," it so happened that the Premier journeyed to Invercargill to attend a banquet given in honor of the Hon. Mr Ward. In the "Star" of February 1st, the following telegram appeared, dated Invercargill that day, from its Special Reporter, under the big head line, "Brought to Book"—

"I have the best reason for saying that the "Evening Star's" article calling attention to Mr Grattan Grey's criticisms in the "New York Times"

page 6

of colonial policy has been brought under the notice of the Premier. But for the fact that Mr Grey is an officer of Parliament, and therefore under the direct control of the Speaker, and as practically there is no Speaker at present, immediate action would be taken. It may, however, be taken for granted that the Government intend to prevent Mr Grey, while drawing colonial pay, from repeating the attacks on the Colonial policy he has been in the habit of forwarding to the American press."

The Reporter "had the best reason for saying," Ac., Ac. Of course he had, but he might just as well have been candid, and said for a fact that the "Star" article had been brought under the Premier's notice, and by whom the little comedy was so ill-disguised.

A few days after the appearance of the "Star" article, a very able and manly letter from the pen of Mr Wm. Hutchison, ex-member of the Housed Representatives for Dunedin City, was published in the "Star." That letter not only demolished the "Star," so far as its attitude in regard to myself was concerned, but it was also an eloquent protest against what that gentleman rightly considered to be a most serious menace to liberty. As I consider that every lover of liberty in New Zealand should have an opportunity of perusing Mr Hutchison's letter, I now give it the wider circulation which the issue of this pamphlet will ensure to it. The letter is as follows:—

Freedom of Speech.

To the Editor.

Sir,—Your publication on Monday last of a letter written by Mr. Grattan Grey, of the "Hansard" staff, to the "New York Times" has betrayed you into an advocacy of intolerance, against which, I hope, you will permit me to protest as mildly as I can. I may not blame you over much; Jingoism is in the air. During the last few weeks some of my best friends have written and talked as much rhodomontade about war and glory as would more than suffice for a whole generation—sheer rhodomantade without either rhyme or reason, the "Absent-minded Beggar" included. What fun could have been made of a large portion of it; but the subject is too serious for fun or even an approach to it. "You speak of going to war," says a lady who has much at stake, "as if it were going to a wedding." A wedding indeed—the wedding of death to many a brave heart. What dreary days and sleepless nights this war has already brought to many thou ands of homes. Here are our own young fellows—standing or lying on some veldt strewn with shot and shell, ruined tumbrils, and dead men and horses—in constant danger. It is very pitiful and very cruel; and all for what? But the residents for the most part maintain an uneasy silence, unwilling to add to passions already angry and excited.

Occasionally, however, one must speak even as a measure of self-defence, and this case of Mr. Grey is one in point. This gentleman differs from you, as well as from a large majority of colonists, on the Boer war. He does not think sending contingents from New Zealand necessary, and generally disapproves of the stir which has been made. He may be wrong in these opinions; and it is part of your duty, having published his letter, page 7 to show that he is so. Simply to say, as you do, that his statements are offensive and inaccurate, as well as "couched in a sneering form of language," is hardly enough. But I am not concerned to maintain the correctness of Mr. Grey's opinions; they speak for themselves. I am, however, concerned to maintain his right, and the right of every New Zealander, to express their views, whether popular or unpopular, on every public question that may arise. Diffidently, but with unwonted confidence, I stand by the right; all the more when I find it has no friends in high places. What do I read in the "Star" of last night? This, namely, that Mr. Grey's letter had been brought under the notice of Mr. Seddon, and that but for there being no Speaker immediate action would be taken in regard to it. The meaning of that intimation is very obvious. It is intended to punish Mr. Grey for publicly exptessing opinions on the war contrary to those held by the Government. Coming events cast their shadows before.

I hold no brief for Mr. Grey, but I am sorrowfully convinced that freedom of speech and what Milton described as "the liberty of unlicensed printing," are just now seriously menaced in this colony. I do not heed much that babbling fellow, the man in the street, or even the crowd, when they hinder men from saying what they will; nothing so unstable as a crowd. But the case assumes a graver aspect when men in responsible positions take upon them at public meetings, not only to assail freedom of speech, but to suggest special treatment for those who indulge in it. If you will allow me I will show how it develops in Dunedin. A gentleman holding the office of Public Prosecutor for Otago is reported to have used this language: "Nor was this a time for criticism. Every man who criticised the policy of the British Empire at the present moment was a traitor, and ought to be hounded out of it." If so, Mr. Public Prosecutor, you have a duty to perform, and I say to you as Hamlet said to the player: "Leave thy coarse faces and begin." The writer of this letter holds Imperialism and the Boer war arising out of it to be terrific evils. He does not write anonymously; he is within your jurisdiction, hound him out or hound him down if you dare. Perhaps, however, I am attaching too much importance to the sayings of one who, although a high official, is good-naturedly credited with speaking first and thinking afterwards.

It is impossible, while on this subject, to avoid referring to what Mr. Justice Williams said regarding it At a large meeting in the Agricultural Hall he spoke as follows: "If anyone says to you 'I don't approve of the war,' then there is only one answer: 'Sir, you have got to approve of it. When your mother is in trouble it is your duty to help her even though she may to some extent have brought her trouble upon herself." I have the greatest respect for Mr. Justice Williams, if he will allow me to say so, and I don't think, from his point of view, the case could have been better put, but the least said of its logic the better. I can only suppose that in the furore of cheers and songs and martial music—an atmosphere so different from that to which he is accustomed—he was carried away by the crowded and enthusiastic meeting, and said more or less than he intended. Does Judge Williams think that an honest man should go about among his fellows day by day saying fine things about Imperialism and its war, when he believes them all the time to be outrageous wrongs? That is in effect what the Judge's dictum amounts to; it, however, suggests but poor specimens of manhood, and I at least must respectfully decline to follow it. The simile of the mother is very fine, but it lacks applicability. Children who do not help their mother when in trouble are not worth their salt, but the kind of help depends entirely upon the nature of the trouble. The Eastern sage has told us long ago that the mother may forget—alas! it is an everyday experience; a knock on the head, some mysterious illness, may turn a sweet and loving woman into a raving maniac. She is to be page 8 tenderly cared for, but she may not be allowed to work her will. She must be restrained. And our British Mother would just now be all the better of a good deal of judicious restraint.

But I pursue the subject no further. Be assured it is no pleasant experience to be compelled to differ from friends and neighbours on a matter of momentous importance, but there are times when what one believes to be the interests of truth and humanity forbid the suppression of opinions, however unpopular, and this appears to me to be eminently such a time.

I am, etc.,

William Hutchison.

In Dunedin last week the spirit of Jingoism was at fever point. In addition to the excited City population itself, thousands of people from the country had poured into Dunedin to witness the despatch of New Zealand's fourth contingent to South Africa. The opportunity, therefore, especially in that inflamed condition of people's minds, must not be lost to publish portions of the correspondence behind the back of an absent man. The whole business was evidently pre-conceived to fit in with the occasion. It is clear that the Premier must have carried the documents with him to Dunedin for that special purpose.

Thus I find in the Dunedin "Star" of March 23, the very eve of the departure of the Fourth Contingent, when the whole place and people were in a whirl of warlike excitement and enthusiasm, the correspondence introduced under the glaring head lines:—

"The Chief of Hansard."

"Avows Himself A Pro-Boer."

"And Glories in His Rank Republicanism."

Then follows this preface:—

"Some time after his arrival in Dunedin last night a member of our staff waited on the Premier at the Grand Hotel and endeavoured to elicit information on matters of general importance. Amongst other matters Mr. Seddon was questioned regarding an article which had appeared in this paper taking Mr. Grattan Grey, chief of the 'Hansard,' to task for his strictures published in the "New York Times" on the Colony's attitude on the war in South Africa. The Premier said that, the "Star" having published the attack, he deemed it right that the paper should he allowed to have Mr. Grey's rejoinder. Parliamentary officers are under the control of Mr Sneaker, and as there is no Speaker till the new House meets it is impossible that any action can be taken till June next. Parliament, however, would have to deal with the matter at once. Had Mr. Grey been a Government officer, the Premier said that he would at once have taken such action as would have prevented a repetition of an offence which was clearly setting at naught the decision of a parliamentary body (vide the report of the Printing and Debates Committee herewith), since the sanction of Parliament had been given to the despatch of the First Contingent to the front,"

It will thus be seen that once again the Dunedin "Star" man, to Use an expressive vulgarism, was quickly "on the job." I ask the public if it was Fairplay to select such an occasion to publish these portions of the correspondence? Was the fact of doing so not calculated to seriously prejudice me in the minds of the excited residents of Dunedin and those who had come in to witness the departure of the Contingent next day? Nay more, was it not also calculated to prejudice me beforehand in the eyes of that very tribunal to which my case was to be referred hereafter? Most certainly it was. Was it fairplay? Was it manly?

As to the scandalous aspersions cast upon me by the glaring head-lines I have already quoted, they shew an amount of personal hostility and maliciousness which is shocking to contemplate or to think possible as between one man and another. They are, to say the least of them, cowardly in the extreme.

But I am not the only one who has been stigmatised by offensive epithets because I hold certain views upon the Transvaal War; and amongst others thus attacked is a gentleman (a brother Journalist) who has not escaped insult and abuse, although he is distant 16,000 miles from his unscrupulous and venomous detractors. Has not our Agent-General, the Hon. W. P. Reeves, been accused as I have been and shamefully slandered behind his back? Has not a prominent citizen of Dunedin charged Mr. Reeves with sending Pro-Boer despatches to this Colony, and has he not demanded that Mr. Reeves should declare himself? Has not the Agent-General even been made the subject of a cartoon, in one part of which he is represented as a sanguinary sans-culotte of the Reign of Terror species, despatching a pro-Boer cablegram to the New Zealand Government as "Citizen" Reeves, and in another part of the same cartoon, dressed in the pink of fashion as Agent-General, sending off another cablegram to quite a different effect?

As a great deal of misunderstanding appears to exist in the public mind with reference to my position, it is necessary that I should put people right on that subject. I am not, and never have been, a Civil Servant, and am subject to no Civil Service Regulations. During my 24 years' connection with the New Zealand Parliament I have continued the pursuit of my journalistic profession in accordance with the distinct understanding upon which I entered that service. The faithful and efficient discharge of my Parliamentary duties is a fulfilment of the contract on my part, and there my obligations to Parliament end. No one has ever dared to insinuate that those duties have not been performed faithfully and well, and with the most scrupulous impartiality. Governments and Parliaments have come page 10 and gone during the last quarter of a century, but my position was never challenged until last session, when my political opinions and criticisms as a Journalist raised the ire of certain politicians, whose attitude towards me was subsequently ridiculed by the "Westminster Gazette," "Review of Reviews" and other equally reputable and influential periodicals.

In further confirmation of the original understanding upon which I entered the Parliamentary service 24 years ago, I now publish the written contract (under the hand and seal of the Premier), under which I accepted the office of Chief of the Hansard Staff:—

page 9
96/1771 "Premier's Office, No. 682. Wellington,

Sir,—I have the honor to inform you that you have been appointed Chief Reporter of the Parliamentary Hansard Staff vice Mr C. C. N. Barron, retired. Your salary will be at the rate of £400 per annum as from 11th June, 1896, with liberty after completion of Hansard each session to take outside work.

I have the honor to be, Sir,

Your most obedient servant,

J. Grattan Grey

, Esq.,

R. J. Seddon

." Assembly Buildings, Wellington.

Let the people of New Zealand make no mistake about it—this is a matter which strikes deeply at the foundation of their liberties—freedom of thought and speech. An effort is being made to exercise in New Zealand a press censorship which would not be attempted, I believe, even in autocratic Russia, and to prevent freedom of opinion. I should be an unworthy member of the honourable profession I belong to if I allowed myself to be dictated to by any Government or party as to what I shall write, or shall not write, in my capacity of Journalist.

I should be wanting in manliness and self-respect if I allowed myself to be placed in such a dishonourable and humiliating position, and if I tamely submitted to the surrender of my civil and political rights for the mere sake of the personal sacrifices I might thus escape from at the cost of independence and honour. I do not happen to be built that way, however, and it is in the name of Liberty that I resent this attempted interference with my rights, and with the pursuit of ray profession.

What I now want the public of New Zealand to do is to carefully read and analyse the correspondence, to seriously ask themselves—What is British liberty, fair play and justice? and to pronounce their verdict accordingly.

There is an honourable way and there is also an arbitrary, illegal, and dishonourable way of terminating a contract, if that be desired. The choice of alternatives I leave to those undertaking the responsibility.

J. Grattan Grey.

Wellington,

While this pamphlet is passing through the press I am in daily receipt of numerous letters from correspondents, many of them utter strangers to me, expressing concurrence with my opinions with regard to the Transvaal War, and their appreciation of my courageous expression of these views. I feel deeply indebted to these correspondents for their sympathy and encouragement.

One of my correspondents, a perfect stranger to me, but whose personal acquaintance I hope to form, writes to me from Dunedin in these Permit me to express my sympathetic and full concurrence with your views on the Transvaal War. I hope one day will be disclosed how the existing excitement in New Zealand originated and has been worked up.It was not spontaneous. With this conviction, and having just witnessed here the enormous programme in getting away the Fourth Contingent, the fraudulent and selfish elements obviously at work afford the strongest emphasis to the courageous expression of opinion by yourself. That it should be possible, already in New Zealand, for political and selfish strategy to attain such proportions, would afford alarm were it not for the declarations and consolations recorded in Holy Writ, Psalm 37."

From Auckland comes a communication signed by several gentlemen, from which I quote as follows:—"Dear Sir, We the undersigned beg to offer you our sincere sympathy in respect to the unjust persecution you are now suffering for your manly, courageous and feeling conduct in reference to the present wicked, unrighteous and cruel war now being carried on by Britain against the Boers, and we assure you that every sentiment you have or may express is fully and heartily concurred in by us. We are one with you in our opinion of the Jingoistic spirit which is at the present time rampant in these Colonies, and we are of the opinion with you that at no far date a reaction will set in. There are hundreds of genuine liberals, who feel on this matter as we do, and if you like to send up any kind of a petition or testimonial we can get it signed by quite a number."

Telegram from New Plymouth;—"Kindly allow sympathiser to express friendship and admiration your noble fearlessness in just cause."

Already, two Journals of high standing—the Wellington "Evening Post "and the Christchurch "Press"—have ably championed the cause of freedom of opinion.

Commenting upon the proposal to call Mr Grattan Grey to account for his article in the "New York Times," the Christchurch "Press" says:—

"It is simply monstrous to talk of punishing Mr Grey because he happens page 12 to hold certain unpopular (and in our opinion incorrect) views on the Transvaal question, and chose to give expression to them in an American paper. We doubt whether if, even in Russia, such censorship of the press would be attempted."

J. G. G.

decorative feature

page 13
page 11

The Transyaal War.

Premier's Office, Wellington,

Sir,—My attention has been called to an article in the Dunedin "Evening Star" of the 29th of January last, which quoted what purports to be extracts from a letter written by you dated from Wellington, 27th October, and published in the "Now York Times" of November 26th, commenting on the action of this and other Australasian Colonies in connection with the despatch of Contingents to the Transvaal, and I shall be glad to know if you really are the author of the letter in question.

I have the honour to be, Sir,

Your obedient servant,

R. J. Seddon.

J. Grattan Grey

, Esq., Chief Hansard Reporter.
Wellington Terrace, The Right Hon.

R. J. Seddon,

Premier,

Sir,—Your letter dated the 6th instant re the Transvaal War only reached me to-day. As my files of American papers have not come to hand for several months past—a matter which I intend to inquire into at the Post Office—I am not in possession of a copy of the "New York Times," nor of the "Evening Star" mentioned in your letter. If you will kindly supply me with a copy of the "Star," in order that I may see the extracts mentioned, I shall have pleasure in supplying you with the information you desire.

I remain, Yours truly,

J. Grattan Grey.

page 14
Premier's Office, Wellington,

J. Grattan Grey

, Esq., Wellington Terrace,

Sir,—The Premier has directed me to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of yesterday's date, and in reply to say that he has not got a copy of the Dunedin "Evening Star," but desires me to send you an extract from the paper which purports to be your letter or a portion of it.

Yours obediently,

Alex. Willis.

(From The "New York Times," November 26th.)

"Throughout the whole of the British Colonies in these latitudes the people have gone wild with excitement over the declaration of war between Great Britain and the Transvaal Republic. There is no limit to their enthusiasm, and the whole of these democractic communities have been suddenly infected with Imperialism of the most pronounced type. Nobody—very few, at all events—pauses to inquire whether the war is a just one, or whether England has any right to interfere with the internal affairs of the Transvaal. The only thing that concerns them is that Great Britain has resorted to the arbitrament of superior force, and, the Mother Country having done this, the Colonies rush to her assistance in crushing poor old Oom Paul and the comparative handful of people in the Transvaal, who consider they have a right to govern themselves without foreign interference or dictation. Everybody feels, of course, that the Republic must go under, and the immorality of the principle that might is right is completely disregarded in this wave of Imperialism that has swept over the whole of the British possessions on this side of the globe. No sooner was the news received of the declaration of war than offers of assistance were cabled to the Imperial authorities from all the Governments of Australasia, and these were at once accepted, more, perhaps, on account of the moral effect they would have upon other nations than because of any substantial assistance the Colonies would lender during the progress of hostilities, because, all told, the combined contingents will not exceed a thousand combatants. To New Zealand the honor belongs of being the first to despatch its mounted rifle corps of 212 officers and men a week ago, and to-day the transport will leave Melbourne, conveying to South Africa the total strength from the Colonies of Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, Western Australia, and Tasmania. To outside nations it would appear not a little odd that self-governing Colonies, 7,000 miles away from the scene of strife should send off bodies of men page 15 to do battle against people they have had no quarrel with, or that they should think it necessary to assist in the subjugation of a people who claim the right of self-government the same as they do; but the jingoistic spirit at the Antipodes is too inflamed just now to care anything about the rights or wrongs of the question. What is uppermost in the public mind is that the Transvaal Republic, as a nation, must be effaced, and the whole of the South African Continent painted an Imperial red from the southern limits of Cape Colony to the Equator. Of course, no one for a moment doubts that England can accomplish this unaided by Colonial troops, and why, therefore, should these distant Colonies interfere at all? In money alone, it will cost the principal of them £50,000 a piece before they have done with the business. Victoria, New South Wales and Queensland have voted £30,000 each, and New Zealand £5,000 in excess of that amount; but if the war lasts for six months they will require to make calls upon their respective Treasuries, which will bring each Colony's contribution up to at least £50,000. When enthusiasm cools down, no doubt people will begin to think that the money would have been spent to better purpose on public works within the Colonies themselves, but they cannot help remembering the fact that a precedent has now been established, and that the Colonies will have to take similar action upon any future occasion, even without any justification for the belief (as in the present instance) that the safety of the Empire is endangered."

Wellington Terrace, Wellington, The Right Hon.

R. J. Seddon

, Premier,

Sir,—I am in receipt of your letter of 13th instant, enclosing an extract from the Dunedin "Evening Star" of 29th January, containing portions of my article to the "New York Times," published in that influential journal of 26th November, 1899.

I will preface my reply to your request for information as to the authorship of that article by observing that this is not the first occasion on which this same individual connected with the Dunedin "Evening Star" has displayed the strongest possible animosity against me under the cloak of anonymity, and has shewn personal malice to an extent which must meet with the reprobation of all honest, upright and respectable Journalists. The individual in question, however, is not a Journalist of any weight or position outside the parochial radius of that paper's circulation, and very little within that limited area. Professional etiquette, straight- page 16 forwardness or the instincts of journalistic camaraderie could not be expected from such an uncultured source; and I leave him, as all paltry things like him should be left, to the contemplation of his own littleness and to the enjoyment of whatever fruits may come from the ventilation of his jealousy and maliciousness. He has my assurance, however, that whether or not he succeeds in his present attempt to do me an injury, it is a matter which will neither derange my appetite nor induce insomnia.

As to the article contributed to the "New York Times" from which the extracts have been republished, I beg to inform you that I was the author of that article, and that I adhere to the opinions therein expressed, regardless of consequences.

In the first place, let me inform you that throughout my life I have belonged to the party of peace, and have been an uncompromising opponent of recourse to war for the settlement of international difficulties. I had made a special study of the Transvaal Question, had read all the available literature connected with the subject from every standpoint, and had become, as an impartial and conscientious observer of events, a stanch adherent of the humane and enlightened policy of England's greatest commoner. Mr. Gladstone, with regard to the Transvaal Republic. When war was first hinted at in the winter months of last year I could not bring myself to believe that hostilities would actually eventuate, and made no disguise of my sentiments that if war did ensue, it would be one of the most unjust and unrighteous wars recorded in history. I could not, however, believe that the British nation would allow itself to be deluded by a band of greedy and grasping capitalists into undertaking a war against a people whose right to self-government had been fully recognised; for I maintain that it is a war which has been fomented by capitalists, and it is lamentable to think that so much precious blood has been and will be spilt and so much treasure expended at the instigation of these moneyed magnates for purposes of their own aggrandisement. Does anyone in his proper senses, anyone with the smallest atom of intelligence or fair-mindedness, really believe that but for the gold and diamond discoveries in South Africa the Boers would ever have been disturbed in their isolation? All candid and thoughful men, however reluctant they may be at this juncture to confess it, must feel in their hearts that the greed of unscrupulous capitalists is in truth the real raison d'être of the present deplorable conflict, the primary cause which lies at the bottom of the hideous tragedy which is now being enacted in South Africa.

Immediately before and after the commencement of hostilities I regarded with deepest sorrow the wave of jingoistic hysteria that inundated these Colonies—the unreasoning and unthinking manner in which this jingoistic spirit was fanned until provincial jealousies page 17 and rivalries have now actually developed in this franctic desire to send contingents to South Africa beyond anything that was ever contemplated when the movement began.

When I considered the marvellous wealth of Great Britain, her inexhaustible resources in men and money, her population of forty four millions of people to draw combatants from, her powerful Navy to defend her against any possible or probable concert of European nations, I could not suppose that England required assistance from her far-off Colonies in settling her differences with a comparative handful of people like the Boers—two hemmed-in Republics in South Africa, without a seaboard and without ports for replenishing supplies which in course of time must become exhausted. All these considerations forced me to the conclusion that it was an act of the supremest folly to drain the Colonies of their population for the purpose of doing battle seven thousand miles away in a struggle about the eventual issue of which there could not be the slightest anxiety or doubt.

If it was considered necessary to impress foreign powers with the moral lesson of Colonial loyalty and enthusiasm by the despatch of a first contingent from each, does it not strike one that the good effect of that lesson is likely to be destroyed by the sending of contingent after contingent upon the same unfortunate errand? Will not this apparently unrestricted exodus to South Africa create an impression in unfriendly quarters that England is in extremities, and that her prestige and prowess are in imminent difficulty and peril? I am not so pessimistic as to suppose for one moment that she is, or is at all likely to be, in such straits, or that her foremost prestige amongst the nations of the earth stands the slightest danger of not being maintained in this war with the Boers. But as tin Australasian I protest against this serious diminution of our population, against this maddened rush from our shores when, if we look to our own requirements, we want to keep every man of them here. What is the state of the defences in any one of the Australasian Colonies? Will anyone say for one moment—or if he does say it, does he really believe it?—that our own defences are in an effective condition? Is there any difficulty in realising the awkward position these Colonies might be placed in at any moment in the event of any European complications that might arise? In this position of affairs, why send the best physical types of our young men, the very flower of our population, out of the country, when it is population, and population of that stamp, we stand most in need of? Why contribute funds to the wealthiest nation on earth when the money could be more wisely and legitimately expended in placing ourselves in a position to repel an enemy?

In the pursuit of my journalistic profession I have given expression to these views. That they are not popular with the present page 18 unthinking and uninformed multitude I doubt not; but they are my deep-rooted and conscientious convictions nevertheless; and if I am to suffer for the candid and fearless exposition of them, I find solace in the belief that they will be acquiesced in eventually when the feverish pulse of the majority gets restored to its normal condition, and calmness supplants the existing excitement. It is all very well for people to shout themselves hoarse, to be carried away by waving banners and by the intoxicating influences of martial airs; only wait until the score comes to be reckoned up, until the piper has to be paid, and depend upon it they will dance to a less agreeable tune. At the same time, I feel convinced that even in this small community there are hundreds, nay thousands, of people who think exactly as I do on the subject, and only refrain from giving vent to their feelings in order to escape insult and abuse from persons who have allowed this demon of jingoism to make captive of their reason and to warp their better and calmer judgment.

It is one of the highest functions of every honest, well-meaning and straightforward Journalist to do all he can on occasions such as this to stem the current of popular frenzy, to inculcate the salutary ideas of moderation, and to strive all he knows to direct public opinion into the best and safest channels. In my humble capacity this is precisely what I have endeavoured to do, profoundly and conscientiously believing that I was doing right, and believing also that I was living in a free and enlightened country. Is it possible that I have been under a delusion all the best years of my life, and that I am now to realise that freedom of thought and speech in New Zealand—that boasted palladium of individual and collective liberty—is nothing but a myth after all?

I remain, Yours truly,

J. Grattan Grey.

41, Wellington Terrace,

W. Gray

, Esq., Under Secretary, Post and Telegraph Department,

Sir,—It is a remarkable fact—an extraordinary coincidence to say the least of it—that ever since the "New York Times," and my literary connection with that great newspaper was made the subject of a debate in Parliament last session, my files of American papers have not come to hand, although previously they reached me at regular intervals. Will you kindly make inquiries into the matter, as I am entirely at a loss to understand how the files have gone astray.

I remain, Yours truly,

J. Grattan Grey.

page 19
General Post Office, Wellington,

Subject:— Complaining that copies of the "New York Times" posted to you have not been received.

Sir,—I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your letter on the above-noted subject. A reply will be sent at an early date.

Yours obediently,

W. Gray, Secretary.

J. Grattan Grey

, Esq., 41, Wellington Terrace, Wellington.

[Note.—It is again a remarkable fact that a day or two after the despatch of my letter of 13th February, my files of American papers by that month's incoming San Franscisco mail duly reached me, but the missing files complained of have never yet come to hand.—J.G.G.]

General Post Office, Wellington,

Sir,—Referring to your letter of the 13th instant, stating that your files of American newspapers have not for some time back come to band, I have to inform you that there is no trace in the post office here of any papers addressed to you. Any that may have reached Wellington would have been delivered in the usual manner. If you will, however, specify what papers are missing the Department will, if so desired, make enquiries about them through the Postmaster-General, Washington.

Yours obediently,

Norman Rose

,

J. Grattan Grey

, Esq., pro Secretary. 41, Wellington Terrace, Wellington.
page 20

The Samoan Question.

Wellington Terrace, Wellington, The Right Hon.

R. J. Seddon

, Premier,

Sir,—In order to forestall any further crawling officiousness and malignity on the part of the Dunedin "Star" man, I beg to inform you that an article of mine on the Samoan Question appeared in the "New York Times" of December 24th, 1899. I have now the honour to forward the subjoined extracts for your information.

I remain, Yours truly,

J. Grattan Grey.

[From the "New York Times," December 24, 1899.]

"No more unwelcome tidings could have been wafted to Australasia than that Great Britain had come to an arrangement with Germany to hand over to that power the control and management of the lion's share of Samoa. The transfer has occurred at a time when there is little disposition to call into question the wisdom of Great Britain in surrendering Samoa without previously taking the Colonies into her confidence on the question. The outbreak of the Transvaal war has brought with it a tidal wave of Imperialism all over the Colonies of Australasia, and the feeling is so intense that for the moment the Colonists generally are blind to the danger of having a great European power like Germany brought into such close proximity to their shores. Had the proposal been put before them in a time of peace, there would have been a howl of indignation from all the British dependencies in these seas, and a stubborn diplomatic effort to prevent Germany from obtaining the foothold she has gained in Samoa.

"Powerless as the Colonies now are, without any hope of getting the thing undone, a strong undercurrent of feeling prevails that Great Britain has not treated the Australasian Colonies as she ought to have done, and this sense of injustice will become intensified with the restoration of peace and a more thorough realisation of the danger to which Germany's presence as a close and powerful neighbor exposes us. It is well known that Germany's interference in Samoan affairs has always been repugnant to the wishes of the majority of the inhabitants of that country, and no less to Australasians, whose chief desire has ever been to keep foreign European page 21 control out of the Southern Pacific as much as possible. To this end, resistance has always been offered against the acquisition of the New Hebrides by France, and, in spite of this, Samoa has been quietly surrendered to Germany, as an expedient of British policy to cultivate the friendship of that nation in a fleeting emergency.

"The only atom of consolation we can discover in the arrangement is that Tutuila is to be American, and that an alliance between the two great English-speaking nations of the world can at any time minimize the dangers arising from such an undesirable Germanic proximity to our coasts. One immediate effect of the banding over of Samoa to Germany will be this:—It will impress the Colonies with the necessity of inaugurating and gradually perfecting a combined system of defence on land and sea, as well for internal safety as for the protection of their commerce with the outside world, and the insuring of a greater influence in the councils of the mother land."

Note.—Nearly three years ago, in the columns of the Melbourne "Age" I warned the Governments of Australasia of the designs of Germany upon Samoa. The substance of that warning was immediately cabled back to New Zealand; and the Premier, on being interviewed by a local press representative pooh poohed the idea, and declared that "there was nothing in it." I pointed out in the "Age" that there could not be the slightest doubt, from information in my possession, that Germany meant to acquire Samoa. That intention was only postponed through the outbreak of the Spanish-American war. So far from there being nothing in the warning, there was unfortunately too much in it, and the surrender of Samoa and its partition between Germany and America have come about exactly as I described in the "Age" nearly three years ago. But for the laissez-faire attitude of Mr. Seddon and similar inactivity on the part of the Governments of Australia, this regrettable consummation would not have happened. A combined and vigorous protest on the part of the Governments of Australasia at that time would have upset the intentions of Germany, because England would never have dared to disregard the wishes of combined Australasia upon a question of such vital importance to these Colonies. As it is, we have now an undesirable neighbour like Germany at our very doors, and to the apathy and want of foresight of those in authority must be attributed this lamentable issue of events.

J. Grattan Grey.

decorative feature

City Printing Coy. (Wright & Grenside), FitzGerald's Avenue, Willis Street, Wellington.—April 2, 1900.