Page:History of Australia, Rusden 1897.djvu/218

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.
190
190

ever in future to receive or detain any prisoner in custody Tivithout some particular charge, or by virtue of a magis- trate's warrant/' Thus summarily did the eivi! power assert itself after the excesses Hanctioned by Grose and his military supporters. In civil matters Dore gave useful but much-neglected advice. One of his first acts was to implore the inhabitants to reduce to clear terms in v^Titing all then' contracts and agreements, duly witnessed and signed* Hunter, unfor- tunately, aided by Atkins, was involved in conflict with Dore. Grose had assigned many more convicts to oflBcers than had been allowed by Phillip or by the Secretary of State. Hunter was instructed to reduce the number, but Collins informs us that *' not with standuig it far exceeded the number which had at home been thought necessary, the Governor did not conceive this to be the moment for reducing it, much as he w^anted men.'* ^ Having thus abandoned his instructions lest he should offend the oflicers, Hunter displayed the same weakness as had been shown by Grose in checking the outrages of the worst of the soldiers. In Feb. 1796 the master carpenter of the settlement while at work in a shed heard himself grossly abused by a soldier who had formerly been a convict, and who left his post as sentinel thus to gratity his spleen. The carpenter, observing that the sentinel had left his arms at his post, took them to the sergeant of the guard. The sentinel was confined* The company to which he belonged, which contained many emancipists, or freedmen, went to the carpenter's house on the following morning, demolished the luiildings and furniture, and maltreated the owner. The carpenter identified foiu* of his assailants. A warrant was issued for their apprehension* The soldiers admitted the impropriety^ of their conduct, and offered to indemnify the carpenter for the damage done. The carpenter inter- I I I I ♦ Hunter wrote (Oct, 1795) to the Duke of Portland that he had "thought tit U> continue the excess, but the Duke had prev^iouBly intimated that Mr. Dimdaa' inatruutions on the subject **did not admit of a discretionary constraction^' on the Governor's part. His deapatch, however, had not been received by Hunter when he eontravenod it.