This page has been validated.
10

think and who are not satisfied with the present relations between races. We are as glad, therefore, to welcome calm and rational criticism, such as was contained in the letter signed "North Gregory," as the cordial approval of our present correspondent, "Pioneer." Both writers, we may state, are bushmen intimately acquainted with the outside country, and who have had much experience among wild blacks.

Our correspondent "North Gregory" complains that we make our accusations of cruelty against white settlers and the black police in too sweeping a fashion. The complaint is not a just one. We began by drawing a clear distinction between the small section of settlers who do act with barbarity, the majority who do nothing, and the other minority who actively protest. Our contention is that the second class is equally guilty with the first one. Those who passively tolerate cruelty and murder, committed almost in their presence, condone and share the crime. And we do not exempt the much-quoted townsman "sitting in his arm chair."

Every resident of Brisbane who, becoming aware of what is going on, neglects to do what he can in his capacity as citizen and voter to wipe out the stain which rests on the whole colony, shares the disgrace of it. And this is particularly the case in regard to the Native Police. The officer of that force who does not permit brutality in the execution of his duty must be a man of very exceptional firmness of character. He is sent out in charge of savages, naturally prone to cruelty, who have been trained to disregard the few checks their native customs place upon indiscriminate murder, who have had no moral code of any kind substituted for it, and who are so armed and equipped as to give them absolute mastery over the lives and persons of their victims. His duty is to use these savages to keep the wild blacks quiet by shooting them when they are troublesome to the settlers, or when the latter fear they may become troublesome. This is the simple account of his business. He is not permitted to describe what he does, he knows that he has very doubtful legal sanction for any of his actions, but at the same time he is assured that it he keeps the blacks quiet no questions will be asked, and the authorities will remain obstinately deaf to all reports of his proceedings. He may be ever so anxious to protect the blacks from unprovoked aggression, but he is absolutely powerless to restrain any white brute who chooses to madden a tribe by cruel and unprovoked injury. The officer's duty is simply to shoot the savages down, when in their madness they seem likely to become dangerous, and to save the white aggressor from the consequences of his own acts. When we write in an indignant strain of actions like these, we never forget that the police themselves are only very partly to blame; the deeds are done by the Government and Parliament of Queensland, who set them about their business. When Judge Jefferies held his "bloody assize" in the west of England the blame of the foul deed was not allowed to rest on the hangman who suspended the victims, but on the King and his officers who ordered the legal massacre to be carried out.

Our correspondent further misunderstands us when he supposes that we are seeking to make the blacks moral. Our aim is a much simpler one. We desire to make peace between the races, and stop the sickening conflict going on. Any attempt to ameliorate the moral and mental condition of the savages themselves is quite another question. Let us give them a far chance of life before we talk of civilising them. And we venture to say that he misunderstands the blacks themselves when