The Star. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 16 1868.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 186, 16 December 1868, Page 2

The Star. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 16 1868.

ttox of those who profess to •üblic, opinion in New Zealand p rotn .time to time, that it .is of the' Middle Island" to send' the North to fight the Maoris. They tell us this •rays. At the same time \© idea of requeuing aid •J," and sneer 'at tbe ; made to raise men

in Australia. Thesi^|jf^pQ^. selfreliance advocates, ana^^Hhe --iaame time the gentte'tnen who, talk to us about- ..." the of the colony," the duty; of assisting" our poor brother in the "North," ani all the rest of it. What, lib they really mean ? We ask this; question because it>appears to us that they are somewhat confusedin their ideas. What is self-reliance ? What does ifc imply in regard to the war now going on in the North Island ? It appears to us that the phrase self-reliance, as applied to the Maori war, means that those who are threatened must dejend themselves without any extraneous aid whatever. If this is really the meaning of the term, and we can find no other, ie follows that we in tlie Middle Island liave nothing whatever to do with the question so far as the fighting goes. We say this advisedly, and with every desire to arrive at a proper understanding of the case. Suppose the Middle Island were to send up a thousand volunteers tomorrow, what would these . men be doing if they went to the front ? Fighting for their own hearths and homes ? No. What then ? Help-' ing " our poor brother in the North f " Exactly — that and nothing more. And this, if we examine the case, is precisely the same thing as getting help from England or Australia. The Press of this morning says : — " New Zealand has a much larger and deeper question to deal with than that of putting down the present Native insurrection only. If that were all ; if this was an outbreak which had come upon us unexpectedly, and which there was no reason to believe would ever occur again ; the colony might be justified in applying to the Home Government or elsewhere for assistance. At all events the case would stand upon very different ground. But unfortunately the facts are quite otherwise. Merely to suppress this rebellion, without taking any steps to prevent its recurrence for the future, will not be sufficient. The North Island has to be placed in a state of permanent defence against Native aggression. There is no need for us to assume the offensive ; we are not called on to subjugate the Maoris ; but it is necessary that the settled districts !of the North should be made ! secure against inroads by the Natives, and that never again shall the labours of years be destroyed in a few days, as has happened in Patea and Wanganui. Thia view of the case precludes the employment of Imperial troops, or any foreign assistance whatever ; be cause what we want ia permanent security, and we could not get that by any merely temporary aid. Upon the withdrawal of the troops the colony would revert to its former unprotected condition, the Natives would resume hostilities, and all the work would have to be done over again. Evidently, therefore, we shall not get what we want if we depend upon anyone but ourselves. If the colony desired to conquer the Natives, as in 1863, it might well ask for an army from England. If it wished to exterminate them, it might gladly hire strangers to do the butcher's work. But it wants nothing of the kind. It wants nothing in the world but settled peace ; that every man may live under his own vine and bis own fi» tree, harming no one and harmed by none, dwelling in the land, like the men of Laish, quiet and secure." We agree with every word of the above, and we proceed to .show in what sense. Our contemporary implies that outbreaks will recur again and again, and that it is not merely a question of putting down this rebellion. With that we agree. There will be a Maori difficulty as long as there are Maoris. The state of defence in which it is desirable to place the North Island muat be permanent ; the settled districts must be always prepared to resist inroads. This view of the case, as our contemporary says, precludes the employment of Imperial troops, or any foreign assistance whatever. By " foreign assistance," we presume the Press means assistance from without the localities which must be always prepared, always ready, to defend themselves. Now, our view is, that assistance from the Middle Isla,nd ;to the North would be foreign assistance in the strict application, of the term- We contend that our . contemporary cannotget [beyond 4 this— assistance from the ! Siuldle Island to the North is

foreign assistance^, so^-far^'/th^ latter is concerned, to >^U--.>\'n|iehtV/k-id purposes. Does the\P**^« ■ mean ,tp say that a section of .the people -'of: this island are to be always ready ..io rush to arms when : the signal of a : war is given ? He must -either; mean that, or he muat mean that ia portion, of our population is to bo permanently located in the North ? Bai} how located ? Aa what ? If as fighting meay" then they would be a foreign army; if as settlers, they would cease to belong to the Middle Island. It is simply impossible for men going from this island to fight in the North to be regarded in any other light than as foreign assistance to the' North. If we leave our homes here to fight the Maoris, we are going to the aid of thosei who do not rely on themselves. In fact, the theory of self-reliance, if it means that the Middle Island is to send men to the North, is nothing more; nor less than a sham, for it means that the North is to rely on the South, as it has been doing all along. We have no hesitation in saying that, if self-reliance is to be carried to its legitimate issue, the people of this island have no more to do with the fighting in the North than the people of New South Wales or Victoria. Any aid that we can send in men cannot be other than foreign aid. If our " poor brother in the North" cannot get on without our assistance, then he is not relying on himself, and so it comes back' to the same thing — aid from the Middle Island is foreign assistance to the North. And this, the Press tells us, is not to be thought of. What, then, does the Press mean when it uses such : words as :— ln the early colonies of America there was nb such a thing as a standing army ; the settlers did their cwn fighting. TJp to the civil war the regular army of the United States was a mere handful, and the border ' States were defended, as they are still, against the Indians by the voluntary organisation of the frontiersmen. Why not adopt the same plan in New Zealand ? Instead of trusting entirely to a band of semi-regulars — Defence Force, Armed Constabulary ,*or whatever they may be called — why not organise the whole body of settlers into a protective force ? There would be no difficulty in doing it." * •• *; ■ * "Suppose that our- Militia Act, instead of being practically a dead letter, were strictly enforced, and that every maii within 1 certain ages were called out for a given period in every year for a course of drilling and -instruction in the use of the rifle. We say nothing of the larger view of the question — of tbe duty of every citizen- to be pre--pared to fight for his country ; but only conceive what immense provision we should have for the internal defence of. the colony. Who would; fear iheJ Maoris then? There ; would' lie no j need of touting in Australia for mili- ' tary settlers, or purchasing, assistance in our 'danger by grants. of confiscated land; we would be all military settlers; I Every , district would halve within it \ the mejans of its own defence at any time at an hour's warning. - A Native onslaught would be met by a country in arms. The North Island wouLa never again be humiliated, by sjifeh scenesjaswe have lately read ftf— homesteads plundered and burnt, settlers flying for their lives to the towns, whole districts abandoned to the enemy without; a blow. At the first signal of a Native raid men far and wide would take down their rifles, pour out into the rauks,: and march out to defend their own. They would be. no mere mercenary forcef collected from all quarters, ., with no common, Jfe£li.ng. nor attachment to the cause for which they enrolled ; but menwhbse all was at stake, men attached to, ; each,..opher. by ties of ''-Family aiid friendship, kinsmen and friends gtand\ng' side-by side, knowing and trusting one another, fighting ' for -their "* • hearths and homes^ their "wives and ;, little pnes." Does; all this imply that the Militia Act ou^ht; to be put in force throughout tbe Middle Island,? It T means either this j 6r nothing. * Our'contemporary jmay choose between the two. And, if j the Militia Act is to be put in forceiin; the Middle Island, we ask for\ whatlpinrpose ? Why are we, who have no enemy threatening us, to be subjected to the rigours of the iMilitiai Act ? That is the point. Are we to bold ourselves always in readiness, so ! that "at the first signal of a Native raid, men far and wide would take

down their rifles, pour out into the ranks, and march out ?" Is this what; the Press means ? It cannot be, for' this rush of armed men are to defend their own, to be no mere mercenary force collected from ali quarters, but men whose all toas at stake, men fighting for their hearths and homes, their wives and little ones. We;. in the Middle Island, don't answer -to that description. We would not be fighting for our awn at Wanganui, Taranaki, Poverty Bay, Waikato ; our all would not be at stake, our hearths and homes, our wives and little ones in danger. We would simply be fighting for " our poor brother in the North," giving him foreign assistance, and doing for him what he ought to do for himself. Again, we ask the Press what it means. Xet our contemporary speak out plainly and honestly.