criminal in each case, whether black or white. All this would require a mixed force such as you advocate. As to the truth of those accounts which you have given of particular outrages on blacks, and which have gone unpunished, I see no reason to doubt them, many acts of equal inhumanity of the kind having to my own knowledge gone unpunished, and I have no doubt the same thing is going on now, and will do so till the people of this country are convinced of their responsibility in the matter; and I only hope you will go on exposing the rottenness of our present system of dealing with the blacks till you have made the facts widely known, and then something like justice will be done—if our boasted civilisation is not a sham to all who cannot buy its fruits. As on all previous occasions when anyone has attempted to draw public attention to the evils complained of, your efforts in favor of humanity on this occasion have so far called forth little but hostile critisism, scorn, and ridicule; or at least friendly advice to leave the question to those who understand it. Emboldened by the uniform success of such tactics previously, writers have again come forward proclaiming themselves the champions of the pioneer settlers, ready to defend them against misrepresentation and slander; denouncing your ideas as wildly absurd, remarkable chiefly for their impracticability, and so on, however seemingly benevolent; at the same time expecting implicit belief in their own statements on account of their (the writers') wide experience, practical common sense, and intimate knowledge of the nature and character of the blacks, &c. We are told that it is only people who are unacquainted with the hard realities of frontier life who ask for these reforms—visionary sentimentalists, dwellers in towns, and so forth; and the charge has generally been a telling one, on account of persons not allowing their names to appear when writing against the abuses in question; and so people take critics such as "Never-Never" at their word, and decide that these matters are properly understood only by such persons as he is described to be (by himself), and that they must be settled in the natural way—"the survival of the fittest"—which, interpreted by "Never-Never," means that every scoundrel who has a mind to should be allowed by society (as indeed he is now in most places) to rob and murder the blacks with as much freedom from punishment as if they were pigeons. Such conduct may be according to wild beast nature, even if men degraded themselves, as some do, to the level of wild beasts, for then they cease to be men, to all intents and purposes. And so, with all due respect to "Never-Never's," profound, wisdom, we may be allowed to call his conception of human nature a beggarly one, if he thinks it would be natural for men to let the weak and defenceless fall victims to the worst passions of mankind; this sort of thing is called (rightly so) inhuman, unnatural, and brutal. Besides, if allowed, where is it to stop? Are the Chinese to be the next we are to conclude want shooting, "being useless?" And what about the useless members of society of our own color; are they all to perish whilst society looks on to see "Never Never's" notion of a natural law work out? The natural result would be the mutual destruction of all—not the survival of the fittest. Let us look at the question fairly; use our reason and experience; grant that we have a plain duty to perform towards every black as well as white person—to protect as well as to punish him—and I fully expect we should find the task an easy one, and easier year by year. And I maintain that the blacks are, in the greater part of the country, wonderfully easy to manage, and very useful. As to the Native Police force, I am of opinion that with some slight alteration as to its composition, and a radical one as to its methods, it would be the most suitable for the greater part of the country; it is a cheap and competent force, and only wants to be properly worked. I think those who have bad the best opportunities of judging the question should, in justice not only to the blacks but to themselves and "outsiders" generally, give their experiences and express their views. It is usually represented that outsiders get accustomed to seeing blacks brutally ill-treated and become indifferent to it, and that the desire for reform comes from people living in civilised parts. I think this is a mistake, and can only say that, after having worked on stations with blacks for about 20 years in old districts and on the very outside stations, I never saw the necessity for anything at all like the extermination policy; on the other hand, I know that within two years of the first settlement of some Western rivers the blacks have ceased to trouble the whites and have become very useful in many ways; and I am pretty sure that very few people could be found in the West who approve or ever pratrice such a plan as "Never Never" advocates. There are a few, I know, and I hold that they should be punished most severely when possible; at all events never encouraged in the way they are. As to our being committed to a course of harsh and cruel treatment of blacks, having unjustly taken their country, I think it nonsense. I don't admit it was their country, and want proof of it;
