Current Topics

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XX, Issue 22, 18 March 1892, Page 1

Current Topics

AT HOME AND ABROAD.

The proposal for the renewal of Kanaka labour in Queensland sremi anything rather than a mark of progress. The spirit of the dty is generally opposed to slavery, and among the more admirable movements of the times are some for the suppression of the remnant of it that still remains. It will, we know, be denied that the labour referred to has anything to do with slavery. We shall be told of tbe enlightened disposition of those who make use of it, of the precautions taken by Government to hinder anything in the shape of an abuse, and of the complete capability of the labourers to take care of themselves. We shall be told a great dtal that is very plausible, bnt the more of -this that, as the saying is, we let in through one ear and out through the other the better. As to the character of the employers, it may be very excellent. We have nothing to advance against it, but the best of good people, if they put themselves in a f ilse position, may not be able to help themselves, and mty have to Hct as circumstances demand of them. As to the precautions observed, neither have we any. thing to say against them. They may be very good so far as they go, but who is to answer for their not being evaded 1 The theory is that vessels sent to the islands to recruit take on board only such natives as, with a perfect unders'anding of what they are about, agree to emigrate and serve for three years for fixed wages. Into this there enters no mention of facts that, as is well known, have occasionally taken place ; of the carrying off of men and boys against their will, and that of their people ; of canoes overturned and their occupants seized in the water and flune; into the hold ; of everything, in short, that unscrupulous men, determined to make their enterprise pay, and knowing that the chaacea of their being called to account are as slight aa possible, will naturally do. Nor is it to be received as proved that Government officials in tbe colony are to be relied on as impartial in their reportß as to how matters are conducted there. We need not necessarily suppose that they would make voluntary misrepresentations. The influence of tbe rich man, however, has often something of a stupifying effect. It commonly inclines those who are subject to it to take the rich man's view of the case— and the capitalist is not always a philanthropist. As to the capability of the Kanaka to take care of himself, be ii a stranger in a strange country. He does not understand the language of the locality, nor is hi 3 language understood there. He is simple and ignorant and helpless. He ia for the time being a chattel in the hands of the master who baa purchased him. Of course we know that the employer has only paid the sum required to defray his passage from the islands. This we know, aa we know a good deal more, but we also know its meaning. Tbe Kanaka must work to cover expenses — for even the most excellent employers cannot afford to throw away their money. Bat he has not been used to work, and does, not easily take to it ; no untrained adult does bo. The probabilities are that even when he has been engaged by means of some sort of an agreement— and has not, in plain terms, as often bappens, been kidnapped, he has understood nothing of what would be required of him. As they say, however, the bird, that can sing and will not sing must be made to sing Suppose, then, there is some suspicion of a cow-hide on the plantation. We have personally heard something to that effect and on trnst-wortby evidence too — bat the subject is one that people who were not independent were expected to avoid, aa as a rale, independent people did not reside ia the immediate neighbourhood of a sugar plantation. A^ a matter of fact, the very nature of the case makes Kanaka labour, to all intents and purposes, a condition of slavery. It is, moreover, a kind of slavery that is also demoralising and injurious in its effects, both with regird to the people subjected to it and to thosa amoug whom it is introduced. The islanders, who at best are humbugged and bamboozled into submitting themselves to it, have nothing to gain, but everything to lose by it. The colonists, with the exception of tbe moneyed minority, are exposed to unmixed evils from its existence among them. We ate now

A BPAKKLIS^ W.Y.T.RfHNI,ATOi;

NOT TO BE HEABD OP.

A NICE QUESTION.

told that sugar cannot be grown in the more Northern portion! of th« colony unless black labour be employed. How this may be we do not know. We do know that at a time when the same argument wm applied to the more Southerly districts we ouraelrei saw sugar grown there successfully by white labour. We saw in particular a plot of of cane grown by white labour in a paddock adjoining one in which black labour was employed, and which was mnch the mure luxuriant. Its grower, an Kugliih settler, a gardener by trade, and as such a man of first-class qualification, ridiculed the claim that black labour waa'«eceesary — and, although solicited, would have nothing to do with it. The question is, meantime, as to whether, under any circumstances, slavery is permissible. Is it lawful to destroy, or to hasten the destruction of, even an inferior race of human beinga, for the benefit, not of another and a superior people, but of a small and privileged class among that people — and that, too, to the prejudice and iDJary of the majority ? Is it lawful to do evil that good may come, and does the end justify the means? Is it lawful to apply this axiom even to secular, or, as in this instance we may truly say, to profane objects 1 That, in fact, is the true meaning of the question regarding Kanaka labour.

DEFICIENT HAMAMOUCHI,

The latest news is that Sir Robert Stoat has been appointed aa honorary offioer of the Grand Orient of France. Sir Robert, we are told, ia now qualified to take bis seat, when be visits Paris, in the Supreme Council of the Order. Sir Robert, we admit, is calculated to adorn the position. Nevertheless, it is not only Ollendorf that mußt form the subject of his studies, if he desires, as no doubt be does, to shine with especial brilliancy when he takes his sent in the Council, at Paris. Sir Bobert, in fact, as we also saw a couple of weeks ago, belies his reputation. Instead of beiDg foremost among the savant of the period, as we bad long believed him to be, he haa proved himself dep orably deficiant. Sir Rjbert, we now find, is likewise altogether astray in his anthropology. We have before ua a long list of the masters of this science, and every oae of them contradicts him. Sir Robert, for example, quote* a few figures toßhow that cnm« is a matter of choice, a thing to be diminished, if not Bfamped8 f amped out, by a abort course of secular leaching. All the authorities we allude to declare that it is nothing of the kind, that the doctrine of free will is an enormity, an anachronism, that the criminal cannot help himself, that he cannot be corrected, that he fatally inherits his character as a criminal, and if not from his human ancestors, from those, at least, who were pre-human and simian Sir Robert is years behind his time, to our intense amazement. He quotes a few figures in support of secular education. These authorities, on the contrary, with a more advanced science, place no hope whatever on education. Their plan, we may remark in passing, is not education but elimination. Ani how to eliminate the criminal element, th-it is the question. The simplest and plainest means of doing so is necsseanly death ; but for so prodigious a slaughter, though one of their more eminent members cites with admiration the examples of King Henry VIII. and Queen Elizabeth in their short method of dea'ing with the criminals and vagrants of their tespeclive reigns, our scientists are not prepared. Some of their proposals, neveitheless, may be, perhaps aaque^i>nable. Bpeaking of the sriminal element, for instance, " M Oarofalo demnnde que Vinficonditi leur toit impotie par une operation chirurgicale" (Revue des Dtut Mondeg, Jaauary I, 1891, p. 187), With the methods proposed, bowever, we are not particularly coicjroed. Oar task is to weigh the merits of Sir Robert Stout as an hoaorary officer of the Grand Orient of France, and, if we find him wanting as such, the fault is not ours. We may add that it would not do at all for Sir Robert Stout to quote figures in proof of the beneficial influence on their country of the Grand Orient, for during the ha'.f century in which they have been particularly active, namely from 1838 to 1887, as we have it also on the authority we have referred to, the criminality of France haa increased by 133 per cent. Aa a marruraoncbi of the Grand Orient, then we fear, Sir Robert has some months of tough atudy before him, It will never do for him to appear on the scene as a supporter of the nefarious doctrine of free will. We doubt if even via good intentions of bolstering up godlessness would be received in excuse of his implied denial of the Bimian ancestor. Everyone, however, must admit (ha

THEIB PROPER PLACE.

as a champion of godlessness bir Robert has received a consistent reward in the boDOur conferred upon him by the Society which has publicly denied the existence of God. Deficient though he may be in tbe advanced science of the pericd — and that is a fault that can be amended, now that it is pointed out— in filliDg the place of atheistical mamamoucbi for the colonies, he is decidedly the light man in the right place. But let us ask ourselves how can it be any longer possible for any man in his senses to avoid seeing wlnt is involved ia the system whose champion is siDgled out for such an honour ? Here is a paragraph w'jicb wf Uke from our contemporary the Adelnile Southern Cross :— " Tall talk. — There has iately been a convention of Orargemen in Melbouroe, and naturally the Home Bale question came up for discussion. Ono of the delegates from New Zealand felt so strongly on the matter that he maintained that rather than allow Home Rule to be granted to Ireland two million Orangemen would line every ditch in Ulster with rifles. Where the two million Orangemen were to come from be did not say ; but as the Orangemen in Ireland number less than half a million he no doubt meant to import some. Long before any importation can take place Home Rule will be conceded, and the riflas— mythical, too, like the Orangemen— will be allowed to lie in the ditches. So much talk has been indulged in by those who profess to be leaders of the Orangemen in Ireland in regard to rifles and their use that it would be a positive relief if something occurred to bring them into requisition, otherwise they will become so antiquated that the people who take them in hand will suffer most from them." For our own part we could quite willingly lend the heroes in Ulster a loan of their confreres among ourselves, and we do hope »hat delegate from New Zealand contemplated just such an accommodation. Where indeed, could our local Orangemen be found more appropriately than in the lining of a ditch ? And the muddier the ditch the more at home^should they feel there. As to the rifles, well— if they discharged them at all it must be from the the shelter of a ditch, or some place of the kind, and it would probably be, moreover, by means of a BtriDg tied to the trigger they'd do it. " Tall talk," indeed. You may well Bay bo, but if you saw the talking articles you would know that, comparatively speaking, Rouen steeple was a dwarf to it. An inch of water in the ditch would drown tbe whole pack of them. It seems, however, that it is not only in Queensland that the unfortunate men of the South Sea Islands have been employei &s slaves. Sir Tbomaß E3monde, for example, in his book, " Around th« world with the Irish Delegates," has a few regretful words to say as to the fate in which the civilisation of the day has involved the He speaks particularly of the conduct of the Germans in Samoa. " A G:rman firm," lie says, "g-iin a foo'iti^ there, cheat two or three chiefs out of portions of their land, of which by native law they cannot depose, plant cocoaout trees, f >Tm plantations, to which they import hundreds of natives from other islands to work as slaves. 1 ' Great things, meantime, we find are spoken of Fiji and of the p.dnniable treatment accoid^l to the lab urers there. But was it not, by tbe way, in ri>eruitin£ labourers for Fiji that one Dr Murray 'bat, if we recollect aright, was the gentleman'^ tit c— became involved in atrocities that form 'd tbe subjjet of a cauw ctlcbrr in Melbourne some twenty years ago? We do nou remember that on that occasion Queensland was concerned. But even suppose tfcat Fiji forms an t xceptio'i t j the rule, it is h mlly poFs.bln to make very much of that. The fact remains that an ur.fortur ato race, destined to extinction in any case, but at lea^t cip^ble of more mercifully fuffdnng the euthamMa, is iv danger of a rtnewal amor g them of a traffic anil a system tht>l had at one time been it c cause of excessive misiry to them, and against which e-ciy man of ordinary humanity is bound to piotest. As to tbe eniDlojment of coluuid labour generally in a British colory, there may pot-sibly b> a good deal to say, and probably the unioDS and the labouring population will be able to mike their voices effectually heard in the matfer. What, however, seems clear is that under no circumstances should the coli ureJ labour employed be that of men unfit to work and it . capable of defending or protecting themselves, if necessary. XI c recruiting and employment of the South Se.i Islanders in the future are sufficiently discredited by what has certainly been their nature in tbe pa6t. How many curiosities, we should like to know, of the type of Mr Samuel Hodgkinson, ex.M.H.R, have adorned the Farliament of New Zealand, or . mayhap still adorn L. If curiosities of the Samuel Hodgkicson type bave leave >ed that august assembly to any extent worth mentioning, or still leaven it, no wonder the colony is in the pickle it is in, and what is worse, there is small chance of ita being extricated. If Mr Simuel Hodgkinson, as he reveals himself in a letter to the Southland Times, is unique, it might be well to stuff his mortal remains by-and-by, so that they

could be preserved in some museum for the warning and amusement of future generations. The Bishop of Dunedin waste a peony cracker indeed, in blowing up Mr Samuel Hodgkioion, as he claims. Why, a cracker worth a brass farthing would be wasted in the process. M^ Samuel Hodgkinson has gone off by spontaneous combustion. If Mr Samuel Hodgkinson had not exploded in his letter to the Southland Times we should not know anything about the gases contained in his carcase. The escape of laughing gas, for instance, that has thus Uken place is ptupendous. We should think it must effect the gravity of the colony from Stewart's Island to Oape Maria Van Dieman. But et us maka all the allowances we can for Mr Banaii' 1 Hodgkinsin Thit sapient ex-legislator tells us a<? speaks, as we are suggestively told the planets move, in ellipses. Perhaps there is something to be understood in what he says that may preserve him from the appearance of a complete state of idiocy. But, if so, was it not unkind in the editor who published his letter not to prevent him from making the flagrant exposure he has made of himself ? Mr Samuel Hodgkinson undertakes toconvictßUhop Moran of a mis-statementincondemn-ing as falee the assertion made in Collier's history as to the sale of indulgences. He quotes, first of all, the old calumny relating to Leo X and Luther. But what was it Carlyle's schoolmaster used to inquire when they brougot him a new pupil 7 "Are you snre he ia not a dunce ?" We bAve no such certainty with regard to Mr Bamuel Hodgkinson. On the contrary, Mr Samuel Hodgkinson has expressed himself in writing, and thus imposed a complete impediment to our giving him the benefit of the doubt. We need not, therefore, seek to enlighten Mr Samuel Hodgkinson. He has not faculties to take in the truth of the matter. Bat Mr Hodgkiason goes on to deliver himself as follows :— " However, as Romanists will not accept Protestant testimony I must summon witnesses from amongst members of tneir own Church." Into an elimination of the labour expended by Mr Samuel Hodgkinson in doing this we need not enter. Much midnight oil, no doubt, he spent as he sweated over controversial manual?, compiled by men as egregious as himself. But the result is that for every point he desire* to prove he produces a proof to the direct contrary. In testimony that indulgences were sold, (1) he cites a case in which a Franciscan monk condemned certain trafficking preachers as imposters and liars ; (2) he cites the General of the Dominicans as equally emphatic against these people ; (3) he cites several Councils as denouncing their practices. When Mr Samuel Hodgkinson, in fact, attends in court, if ever he does co, and sees the magistrate send a man to gaol for stealing, we may assume that he finds himself in a position to cite the case as a proof that the British Constitution approves of theft. " The Bishop also asserts," saya Mr Hodgkinson ' ' that ' the people did.not think the money paid for those pieces of paper or parchment would buy for them the righteousness of saints.' '« Again, Mr Hodgkinson essays to prove that black is white by showing that it ie black. In contradiction of the Bishop he proceeds to quote from (1) a bull of Pope Clement XIV ; (2) a bull of Pope Leo XII ; (3) Dens' Theology. And. again, not one of his quotations has the least bearing on the point he would establish. Can Mr Holgkinson read, we should like to know, or did he merely get this letter written in his name and take it on trust. If so his amanuensis has seriously betraye I him. Here, fir txample is the concluding sen encu from the pa«sage he quotes from toe bull of Leo XII. to prove, in contradiction of Di Moran, that the people thought that the momy paid for these pieces of piper or parchment would buy for them the righteousness of sainis. "During this year of jubilee we mercifully give and grant in the Lord a plenary indulgence, remission and pardon of all their sins to all the faithful of Christ, truly penitent and confessing ttuir sins, wbo shall visit the churches of blessed Peter and Paul, etc." Tbis pas»age contradicts, in a manner that we should huva thought even Mr Samuel Hodgkinson must understand, the point he ciie-i it aud his oilier qaotations to prove. Again, wejask, does Mr Samuel Hodgkinson know how to read ? la one sense he certtinly does not, for the maa who does not understand the plain and evident meaning of wbat he reads cannot ba truly said to be versed in the art. Mr Ho igkinson is accountable for a deal more. We have, however, sufficiently illustrated his methods of reasoning to show how much Bishop Moran has to fear from his criticism. We have also done enough to prove how much the Colony is to b» congratulated on the fact that the learned gentleman is an ex-M H.R. Public affairs cau ill afford to admit of the meddling with them of curiosities.