PROTEST AGAINST REMOVAL

THE ATTACK ON BOULCOTT'S FARM. TO IHB rtITOR. 'Sir,—lt was with great surprise that I read a paragraph in Saturday's V edition of "The Post" to the effect that a "memorial gravestone" had been removed from the Sydney Street Cemetery, and was to be re-erected (after renovation) somewhere in the Lower Hutt borough. This memorial-stone, it seems, was the one erected .by Lieut., Page and comrades of the 58th Regiment to the memory of Sergeant Ingram and the men of the 58th Regiment who fell at the attack on the military post at Boulcott's Farm on 16th May, 1846. The incidents of this attack are fairly wellknown (or, at least, should be). Six men, including .Private William Allen (acting-bugler in the post), were killed and four wounded, including Sergeant E. Ingram. Those killed on the spot . (Boulcott's Farm) were buried alongside where they fell. Later on, the encroachment of the river necessitated the removal, of their remains, and they were re-interred, but where I am unable to say with any certainty, several places being mentioned. Sergt. Ingram, however, die t d from wounds on the morning of 25th May, and on the 26th was buried with full military honours in the Public Cemetery (Sydney street). In the report I have, I note: Four sergeants supported the pall,: and a company of the 58th Regiment, under Lieut. De-Winton, and a party of the armed police, followed the body to the cemetery. The funeral service was impressively performed by the Reverend R. Cole. So much N for the facts of the case. ' ■ One does not like to say much about the condition of, alas, too many of the memorial stones in the .Sydney Street Cemetery. They are no credit to either the City Council or the Government. To a certain extent I understand the position, and it is only a matter of time to have all the stones, etc., put in order, but — . One would like to know by what authority the City Council permitted this stone to be removed. Were the sons and daughters of the old 58th Regiment consulted in this matter? On behalf of, at least, one of them, I beg tv make a protest, late though it is, against this removal. With all apologies to' the members of the City Council, it almost looks as if they were evading a responsibility. If any of the olderresidents of the Hutt or the Hutt Council are really interested in the proper spirit, why did they not set to work on the renovation only of this memo-rial-stone and leave it in the only proper place for it to be; thus setting a good example which might easily be followed by other public bodies and private individuals? Or if they wish to mark the spot where those brave men fell, in the cause of the Empire and for the benefit of the colonists of the future, could they not do so without removing a stone erected in the manner this one was? ;

I cannot understand the reason, or anything else about it, and have not had time as yet to make many inquiries, but those few .1 have mentioned the matter to are emphatic in their denunciation of the whole business. I am quite sure when the matter is more fully known there will be many protests made and, I hope, action taken to prevent the completion of this almost sacrilege.

One thing more. Can the Hutt Borough Council find the true location of this event in our history? If ...they do, I have' an idea they will find'it is outside their borough, and in a place only visited by the fishermen on the Hutt River.—l am, etc., x

W. A. EDWARDS.