CARDINAL MORAN AND SAMOA.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XXX, Issue 9643, 19 January 1903, Page 3

CARDINAL MORAN AND SAMOA.

"Clsouio Telegraph ■ Copyright— United Press Association. SYDNEY, Jan 18. •Cardinal Moron's speech tit the opening of a seminary at Wuverley traversed the criticism of his recent utterances iv reference to Samoa. He said chat he hau repeatedly laid the blame for tlie disgraceful and disastrous struggle m Samoa at the door of the Protestant missionary agents, and was convinced that on their slioulders the main share of responsibility must ultimately rest. He did not, however, desire to exempt irom blame other olh'cials engaged m the shameful proceedings. (Received January 19, 9.40 a.m.) SYDNEY, January 19. Cardinal Moran said he liad been censured lor comparing tlie proceedings ol the allies and their native auxiliaries m Samoa to the Armenian' outrages. Possibly he erred m the comparison. He should, probably, luive said the proceedings were far worse than the Armenian outrages, for the reason that- two great Powers were responsible for them, and they were perpetuated with a semblance of legality, m the name of civilisation, uuder the mask of justice. What could be stronger than the tiual and authoritative decision of King Oscar as arbitrator that the action of tlie American and British warships was an illegal, unwoinuited, wanton and cruel wrong. He warmly denied the allegation that lie had imputed all the calamities of war to the British Admiralty and officers engaged m it. In support of his charges against the protestant missionaries he quoted the reply of the Tanu chiefs, who when asked why they destroyed the Catholic churches and priests' residences, said, "Our white teachers urged us to do so." For proof of his charge that Protestant missionaries at rfamoa "went so far as to use their influence with some of the commanders of British warships to get them to shell the Catholic presbytery and church"— a charge which he decline* to withdraw— Cardinal Moron refers those interested to the German or American Governments, or King Oscar of Sweden., or the London Times. Reasons of distance alone (says the Sydney Telegraph) make it somewhat inconvenient to apply to any of these authorities for the required information ; but, pending the receipt of further testimony bearing upon the matter, it is perhaps not unfair to recall that the charge has been scornfully denied by the officers of the British warship concerned, and that it has been discredited by the commander of the German warship, present at the time, who Jleclared that he was m a position to know 4Bbe facts, and who would, presumably, | be the chief source of any information amounting to "proof" .which the German Government would be likely to have m its possession. Lieutenant Toussaint of the. German warship Falke, interviewed by the Sydney Doily Telegraph, said he had no hesitation m denying tlie statement that the missionaries had approached the captain ■of a British warship and urged him to iire on a Roman Catholic presbytery. The lieutenant said he had no hesitation m denying that. If Cardinal Moran had been informed to that "effect, somebody had misled him. The statement was "utterly incorrect." No v partiality had been, shown. In support of this re- , mark the lieutenant mentioned that on one occasion one of tlie missionaries' oi | the London Missionary Society went on board a British warship, and implored the captain not to fire on the mission, because numbers of the women and children belonging to the Matanfa party had taken refuge m liis church, and might be killed. The captain replied that the Mat an fa- men were all round the locality, and he had no option but ,to :me. Then the missionary pressed him not to commence firing till he. had returned to the station, and had had time to warn the Mataafa women and children, but the firing was commenced before he got ashore. The reporter suggested that this might have, been the incident of which the Cardinal was informed, and that the action of the missionary m going on board the warship had been misinterpreted. The lieutenant thought that such had very likely been the case, but he could vouch foi the statement he had made. The officers of the British warship Porj)oise were interviewed on the same subject. "So for as my knowledge goes," mid one of the officers, who was actively .engaged throughout the whole campaign, "'the London Missionary Society is absolutely clear of the charge made. Of course it will be said that I am a British officer ; but, as I belong to no •Chuncb, I speak without prejudice. Heaps (ol iota) m Lieutenant Gaunt's regiment — ;some tt his best men, too — were Roman Catholics. , On the other hand, I am bound to say that one of the straightest ;men I have ever met was Mr Huckett, one ■ :of the London Missionary Society's ag•ents. One young missionary of the same : society named Sibree stuck me up at ISavaii, and refused to let either me or my men through his station, because he "claimed that the mission was neutral. I insisted, and suggested that MataafaV men had been allowed to pass. T.his he idenied, and declared that if I forced my way through, it would be m spite of hisprotest. There can, however, be no doubt," continued the officer, "that the French priest helped the Mataafa- men. They were continually seaiding letters of complaint, and m every case un investigation was ordered and the complaints proved to be absolutely untrue. In one instance of this kind, where the priest was shown to be wrong, a senior priest •pleaded as an extenuating circumstance that 'the father was young.' Father !La Roche, who criticised us so severely m a letter to the papers, and who imV ■probably Cardinal Moran's authority, was never within twenty miles of us. One father complained that another priest had toeen fired at by Malietoa's men. The yriest m question was interviewed within two hours of the allegation made on ;]iis tuelialf, and he denied the whole it-liing. He .further asserted that Malie*oa"s men had not even been near him." As against- this there is his Eminence's assertion that — "Every statement made by him regarding it had been more than verified by a special reporter of the London Times, who was sent to inquire into the trouble. This reporter visited Samoa and took all the authetic reports and proved the injustice of the whole proceedings so •clearly that The. Times declined to publish it. He had a copy of that report." As The Times generally despatches •on errands of this importance, competent iand cautious men, the report indicated , -would be important evidence. Putting •out of consideration for the moment the jpart which the missionaries are alleged *o have played, there still stands (remarks *fee Telegraph) that portion of the charge wViich stigmatises a section of the British naivy with acting m n manner unworthy of a service which the Empire, holds m honor. If then the report which Cardinal Moran declares he possesses can afford such information as may lead, even though thus late m the day.' to the detection of a crime, he owns it as a morn) duty to the nation to give it due r.iiblicity. Even if it is not of itself h»\ld to be conclusive evidence, its publication will be certain to' cite the proner authorities to make such investigation as may lpad to this veiT disconcerting matter being settled to the satisfaction, we may hope, not only of the Cardinal, but of the nation.