CRUELTY TO NATIVES CHARGES AGAINST CANNING EXPEDITION.

Evening Post, Volume LXXV, Issue 45, 22 February 1908, Page 5

CRUELTY TO NATIVES CHARGES AGAINST CANNING EXPEDITION.

COMMISSION'S REPORT. WANT OF THOUGHT SHOWN. Br Telegraph. — Picsa Association. --Copyiiglit. (Received February 22, 10.10 a.m.) PERTH, This Day. The report of tho eommissionois uppointed to enquire into certain charges against the Caaning expedition of 1906, is being considered by the Cabinet. Tho commissioners held that cruelty to and ths compulsion, capSivity, and chaining of natives under any circumstances were unlawful ; that want of thought was shown by members of the expedition, that in connection with the method adopted in one instance it was absolutely unjustifiable. . Charges ol immorality with native women have since been withdrawn. They j were absolutely unfounded. Deaths on the previous expeditions would probably not have occurred had I the natives been used to show the locality of wells. The commissioners referred to previous instances where the practice of chaining natives to compel them to show where there was water, had been resorted to. It is stated that Mr. Canning sought to ensure tho safety of members of his party by acting as ho did. Giving ovidence before the commission, Sir John Forrest said he made his first exploring expedition in 1069, when he v.-enl to. what is now known as the Mount Margaret country. The natives wore absolutely wild, and ne could not retain them without using force. In 1874, o:i tho south coast expedition, ha detained natives one day, but kept a watch over them very closely. He found thorn so stupid that he sent them away, and did without their assistance. From his oxporience of natives, especially in the expedition of 1874, he would never coerce a native to go along with him. In the case of a largo party trying to find a stock route, he considered the use of natives might bo justified, but personally ho was adverse to it. Mr. Canning ' had bc?n in tho Government service some time, and had an excellent record. Witness would not go into the bush without first obtaining the services ofi one or two civilised natives. Ho did not approve of chaining natives so as to obtain water. When his party arrived at a water hole they always considered their own convenience in obtaining water. If they deepened it aboriginals could not go down it to water like cats. Some of the wells ne had seen looked as if they had been quarried out of stone with picks and shovels, which showed that the natives could look out for themselves with regard to obtaining water, A civilised native would resent being put on the chain, for he considered himself tha equal of a white man, but a half-civilisod or wild one might not. A's a general practice, he did not approve of chaining a native. His camp had been attacked by 60 natives, fie was of the opinion that the natives considered tho party had been camped at tho water too long, and decided upon driving them away. On the confines of civilisation it soomed to be an act of politeness on the part of a nativo to fetch the women folk in and give them to the whites. He had seen natives chained by the police, and even seen a policeman chain a nativo witness up till he obtained what he wanted, and then let them go. Often in such cases the natives would assist in capturing a man wanted. It was no doubt a rough wa) f , but it was a necessity. Mr. Ilarney, after cross-examination of Mr. Canning, said ho had great pleasure in unequivocally withdrawing, as far as Mr. Canning was concerned, the statement regarding immorality by leaders of the party.