LEST WE FORGET.

Hawera Star, Volume XLV, 30 April 1925, Page 10

LEST WE FORGET.

(By Our Tokaora Correspondent)

MATARIKI MAORI HOUSE.

In your issue of April 17 “One Who Knows” appears to be perturbed by my lengthy reply to your Whareroa correspondent. I waited for a considerable time, expecting a letter from someone better versed in the History of the Maori posts and whare than 1 am. and 1 marvel “One Who Knows’* did not reply to that gentleman’s query. Your Whareroa correspondent is a cultured scholar and seeker after historical facts in connection with Taranaki and Hawera district in particular, Hence one of'the reasons of my extended explanation. I may not have seen matters from the same angle as “One Who Knows.” No two persons will describe an incident, not even a dogfight, in the same terms. I simply recorded what I knew or heard of the totems, or Maori posts, in reply to your V\ harerou correspondent’s inquiry. Shortly after the report of the Nornianliy Town Board’s meeting appeared in the Star authorising a summons to he issued, the c-onstah'o called at my home, I think, collecting agricultural statistics. The conversation ‘naturally turned to the carved Maori posts trouble. and the constable remarked,: “I have the summons in my pocket.” To a layman that reply would convey the impression that the summons was du’v filled in and signed. Taking that meaning from the remark, it never struck me at the moment that a summons in the pocket of an official of the law means quite a different thing from my impression. especially as he further remarked. “I must carry.out niv instructions and obey orders.” Evidently “One Who Knows” must he in the swim, for he or she says “That summons was never issued. The summons was not in the constable’s pocket.” The a hove are the two statements. J et the reader judge which is correct. \f>- object in writing up articles under the “i.es+i We Forget” heading is to get the truth of various events and happenings duly recorded. I have asked through the Star for corrections if my versions he not correct, and I may heir state that 1 have received many private and nnblie commuriieations putting me right, for which I have sincere’v thanked those responsible. Amongst th? latest is “One Who Knows.” and for tho first time in my life have 1 heard that the treatment of Messrs Oav : es and Robson was only a “huge ■nke ” The latter contributed T2O tn-"-'•ids the monuments. The former in o less liberal cheque, hut gave him° and labour for the good work. \nd then to he treated bv a pub’io bodv .as if tbev were criminals! T am glad “On? Who Knows” has placed on record for f>“nre generations t n rond and learn, what sort of “jokers” v m rnnnhv at one time was governed bv..