The Eureka Stockade [54]
with a pair of the finest black whiskers I ever saw, in the garb of a digger, who gave such orders to the coachman, as were always attended to, with the usual colonial oaths as a matter of course, were regaling themselves with bottled porter on a stump of a tree outside the public-house. The dragoons and troopers had biscuit, cheese, and ale served to them, though paid for by themselves, before our teeth.
There was no breakfast for the poor state prisoners, in chains, and lying on the bare ground. They had some trouble before they could obtain from the red-coats watching over them, and blowing heaps of smoke from stump pipes, a drop of cold water--I mean actually a drop of cold water.
Good reader, you know WHOM I did bless, whom I did curse.
Chapter LXXV.
Petite, Sed Non Accipietis, Quia Petistis.
The following document, which does honour and justice to its writer, J. Basson Humffray, to 4500 of our fellow-miners of Ballaarat, who signed it, to the state prisoners themselves, is now here transcribed as necessary to the purpose of this book.
THE BALLAARAT DELEGATES, AND THEIR INTERVIEW WITH HIS EXCELLENCY SIR CHARLES HOTHAM, K.C.B., &c
The public has already seen the written reply of His Excellency to the petition from Ballaarat, signed by nearly 4500 of the inhabitants of that important, but 'officially' ridden place.
We deem it our duty to the public, and especially to those whose delegates we are, to state the main reasons urged by us for a general amnesty, and to make some general remarks thereon, and also upon the reply. We have delayed doing this, as we expected to have returned immediately to Ballaarat, and we did not wish to forestall our intended statement at a public meeting, which would have been held on our return; but as circumstances interfere with this arrangement, we now give our report.
We were very kindly and respectfully received by His Excellency.
We thought it right to state that we repudiated physical force as a means of obtaining constitutional redress, believing that the British constitution had sufficient natural elasticity to adapt itself to the wants of the age, and would yield under proper pressure. But the arming of the diggers of Ballaarat, however reprehensible it might have been in itself, claims to be judged on special grounds, inasmuch as they had special provocation. The diggers of Ballaarat were attacked by a military body under the command of civil (!) officers, for the production of licence-papers, and, if they refused to be arrested, deliberately shot at. The diggers did not take up arms, properly speaking, against the government, but to defend themselves against the bayonets, bullets, and swords of the insolent officials in their unconstitutional attack, who were a class that would disgrace any government, by their mal-administration of the law.
The diggers did not take up arms against British rule, but against the mis-rule of those who were paid to administer the law properly; and however foolish their conduct might be, it was an ungenerous libel on the part of one of the military officers to designate outraged British subjects as 'foreign anarchists and armed ruffians.'
The diggers were goaded on to take the stand they did by the 'digger-hunt,' of the 30th November, which, we are sustained in saying, was a base piece of gold and silver lace revenge. Facts will no doubt appear by-and-bye, elucidating and confirming this statement.
We reminded His Excellency of the fact, that the public had asked for or sanctioned a general amnesty; and although we were prepared to admit that it was unbecoming the dignity of any government to give way to what was termed 'popular clamour,' yet, in this case, the good and the wise amongst all classes, forming a very large proportion of the inhabitants, had asked for it, and we thought the general wish should not be lightly treated. His Excellency observed, "Certainly not." We argued that an amnesty would restore general confidence, and secure support to the government in any emergency; and, even
There was no breakfast for the poor state prisoners, in chains, and lying on the bare ground. They had some trouble before they could obtain from the red-coats watching over them, and blowing heaps of smoke from stump pipes, a drop of cold water--I mean actually a drop of cold water.
Good reader, you know WHOM I did bless, whom I did curse.
Chapter LXXV.
Petite, Sed Non Accipietis, Quia Petistis.
The following document, which does honour and justice to its writer, J. Basson Humffray, to 4500 of our fellow-miners of Ballaarat, who signed it, to the state prisoners themselves, is now here transcribed as necessary to the purpose of this book.
THE BALLAARAT DELEGATES, AND THEIR INTERVIEW WITH HIS EXCELLENCY SIR CHARLES HOTHAM, K.C.B., &c
The public has already seen the written reply of His Excellency to the petition from Ballaarat, signed by nearly 4500 of the inhabitants of that important, but 'officially' ridden place.
We deem it our duty to the public, and especially to those whose delegates we are, to state the main reasons urged by us for a general amnesty, and to make some general remarks thereon, and also upon the reply. We have delayed doing this, as we expected to have returned immediately to Ballaarat, and we did not wish to forestall our intended statement at a public meeting, which would have been held on our return; but as circumstances interfere with this arrangement, we now give our report.
We were very kindly and respectfully received by His Excellency.
We thought it right to state that we repudiated physical force as a means of obtaining constitutional redress, believing that the British constitution had sufficient natural elasticity to adapt itself to the wants of the age, and would yield under proper pressure. But the arming of the diggers of Ballaarat, however reprehensible it might have been in itself, claims to be judged on special grounds, inasmuch as they had special provocation. The diggers of Ballaarat were attacked by a military body under the command of civil (!) officers, for the production of licence-papers, and, if they refused to be arrested, deliberately shot at. The diggers did not take up arms, properly speaking, against the government, but to defend themselves against the bayonets, bullets, and swords of the insolent officials in their unconstitutional attack, who were a class that would disgrace any government, by their mal-administration of the law.
The diggers did not take up arms against British rule, but against the mis-rule of those who were paid to administer the law properly; and however foolish their conduct might be, it was an ungenerous libel on the part of one of the military officers to designate outraged British subjects as 'foreign anarchists and armed ruffians.'
The diggers were goaded on to take the stand they did by the 'digger-hunt,' of the 30th November, which, we are sustained in saying, was a base piece of gold and silver lace revenge. Facts will no doubt appear by-and-bye, elucidating and confirming this statement.
We reminded His Excellency of the fact, that the public had asked for or sanctioned a general amnesty; and although we were prepared to admit that it was unbecoming the dignity of any government to give way to what was termed 'popular clamour,' yet, in this case, the good and the wise amongst all classes, forming a very large proportion of the inhabitants, had asked for it, and we thought the general wish should not be lightly treated. His Excellency observed, "Certainly not." We argued that an amnesty would restore general confidence, and secure support to the government in any emergency; and, even