494 DISADVANTAGEOUS POSITION OF NATIVES 
deserves, I will leave it to those who are acquainted 
with Colonies, and the value of an oath among the 
generality of storekeepers and shepherds, to say how 
far their sworn evidence is, in a moral point of view, 
more to be depended upon than the unsworn parole 
of the native. I would ask too, how often it occurs 
that injuries upon the Aborigines are committed by 
Europeans in the presence of those competent to give 
a convicting testimony , (unless where all, being 
equally guilty, are for their own sakes mutually 
averse to let the truth be known)? or how often 
even such aggressions take place under circum- 
stances which admit of circumstantial evidence being 
obtained to corroborate native testimony ? 
Neither is it in the giving of evidence alone, that 
the native stands at a disadvantage as compared 
with a white man. His case, whether as prose- 
cutor or defendant, is tried before a jury of another 
nation whose interests are opposed to his, and whose 
prejudices are often very strong against him. 
I cannot illustrate the position in which he is 
placed, more forcibly, than by quoting Captain 
Grey’s remarks, vol. ii. p. 381, where he says : — 
“ It must also be borne in mind, that the natives are not tried 
by a jury of their peers, but by a jury having interests directly 
opposed to their own, and who can scarcely avoid being in some 
degree prejudiced against native offenders. 
The opinion of Judge Willis upon this point 
may be gathered from the following extract, from 
