Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. FRIDAY, JULY 24th., 1936. MAORIS AND SPRINGBOKS

Greymouth Evening Star, 24 July 1936, Page 6

Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. FRIDAY, JULY 24th., 1936. MAORIS AND SPRINGBOKS

•pi-IE Arawa request that no Maoris be included in the 1 earns to meet the South Africans during' (he latter’s lour of the Dominion next Rugby’ season, was framed for the most part in commendable language, although it seems rather late in the day to protest against incidents alleged to have occurred during the previous visit of the Springboks, in 1921. Incidentally, it may be recalled that of the 29 visiting players, all but six had. Dutch names. Moreover, the Maori reference to “great Afrikanders of wide and wholesome vision.” included De Wette and Cronje, two who never overcame their hostility to the British.

None of the Springboks who came to New Zealand 15 years ago, is likely to take part in the forthcoming tour, thus the visitors would themselves start with a clean sheet as against the Maoris. Phe fact is that the South Afri- ,

cans are probably less eager to play against the Maoris, than vice versa, owing to the effect such gathering might have on the South African Natives, particularly were the Maoris victorious. It is . very difficult for New Zealanders to realise the ramifications of the colour question in South Africa. In the Dominion the Whites so outnumber the Maoris, that no question of a Native menace arises. Moreover, the Maoris are on a much higher level than the South African native races, aud can be met on the basis of more or less equity. That happy state of affairs does not exist in South Af-

rica, where no encouragement is given to contests between Whites and Natives. Nor is this attitude confined to home events. Many South Africans regarded it as a concession that the Springboks agreed to meet the Maoris in 1921. It was not without intent, that no Maoris were included with the All Blacks visiting South Africa in 1928.

The Arawas, and any other tribes that will support them, cannot be blamed for preferring not to meet unwilling opponents. The Maori memorial to the N.Z. Rugby Union, if really representative, should be accepted in the spirit in which it is sent, the wishes expressed complied with, and every effort made to prevent unseemly incidents. It is to bo regretted that there should be any unpleasant memories between the Maoris and Springbolts, but if either or both sides, wish to avoid each other on the Rugby field, no useful purpose would be served by attempting to force such encounters. Nor would it be fair to condemn the 1921 Springboks for their alleged misdeeds, until more evidence of such offences is supplied by their accusers. Whether the Maoris were well-advised to make public their grievance, at this juncture, must be a matter ol opinion. Having done so, the facts must be faced and the consequences accepted. The success of the tour will in no way be jeopardised by a Maori boycott, should one nationally develop. Perhaps the Maoris themselves will discover they have been too sensitive, and that offence was taken where none was meant.