THE COMING ELECTIONS.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3244, 23 November 1881, Page 4

THE COMING ELECTIONS.

[To the Editor of tho Daily Telegraph.") . Sir,—ln no electorate in New Zealand have the electors a more easy task in the selection of a representative from the material placed at their disposal than that of Waipawa, the difference between J Messrs Ormond, Johnston, and Smith d being so great as to render comparison j an utter impossibility. If there be any truth in the old adage that " there is . nothing so pleasing to a boy. of small ( growth and weak ability than the con- _ templated idea of bis being able to per- _ form the work of a man of unusual stature t and physical power," we must expect at the present to find both Mr Johnston . and Mr Smith in a most charming state f of mind. Mr Ormond's claim upon the electorate I take to be a most substantial one-his representation of the district for t the past twenty years, and _on his acts during that time be bases his claim tor t support. It is a noted fact that while £ Mr Ormond's actions on behalf ofhis . constituency should have been such as to . arouse the' jealousy of the colony in regarding Hawke's Bay " a well-watered garden" from the public fountain, &c, that the colonial press should be so unanimous in regarding him as the most suitable person from amongst our numerous legislators to manage the political affairs of New Zealand. Mr Johnston'B claim upon the electorate, if ( not substantial, has this peculiarity about ( it, being extremely amusing—"my 1 brother the Postmaster-General.' Mr , Johnston is undoubtedly a worthy i settler, and as such he has strong claims ( to our respect and esteem, but , as far as politics are concerned I may claim pardon for thinking that the electors of Waipawa can well affordto do without his proffered services, leaving to bim and "my brother the Postmjrster-G-eneral" the free liberty of basking themselves in the sunEshine of that blessed , portfolio until their hearts are content, , or even " glass-casing" it if they please. I may, however, proverbially remark that a "jewel of gold in a swine's snout adds very materially to the value of the animal. Mr Smith's claim upon the electorate I am one of the many to regard as a puzzle, and feel inclined to believe neither himself nor any of his supporters can be exactly clear on the same point. It cannot surely he his connection with the County Council, as that body from its II botching" and bungling has proved itself a standing disgrace to our " County system," and if it be his connection with the judicial bench it must be the peculiar manuer m which the public expressed approval at tbe action of tbe " Grey Ministry" in appointing him to that elevated position. Mr Smith, I perceive, comes forward in the " liberal interest, a "free breakfast table man." In his speech at Waipawa he almost exposed his tactics. He desired "to point out tbat since last election 1000 electors had been placed upon the district roll that had never been there before; he did "not only want the voice of tbe old settlers, he wanted the voice of the new." I expect it can be easily explained why Mr Smith does not want the voice of the "old settlers," the probable reason being that he is well aware that he will not get them, and therefore on these 1000 new electors who are probably ignorant of the past acts of himself and Mr Ormond he bases his chances of being elected. This brings us face to face with a very important question—the extension of the I electoral franchise, by which the wealth and backbone of the Waipawa County is virtually disfranchised. Men like Mr Hunter and others who have been identified with the growth and prosperity of Hawke's Bay, and who keep from twenty to thirty laborers continually employed, and spend in tbe district thousands of pounds per year, are placed on exactly the same level as the man whose vote is marketable at tbe rate of " a pint of beer." This in a district situate as Waipawa is places men like Mr Ormond—who refuses to ask any one for his vote—in a somewhat disadvantageous position compared with those who are in no way particular as to what means they use to secure their particular ends. Mr Smith in bis speech expressed his views on the " land tax " very clearly ; his " bursting up" policy and disregard for "rights of property " could be easily understood. I was, however, disappointed to finrt that so little mention was made of the duty upon " preserves,"—l mean articles pertaining to the " free breakfast table." Had Mr Smith expressed himself in favor of reducing or removing the duty off " salmon tine," &c, and increasing the penalties in cases where the " contents " varied with the " label," I might have given him my support. As the matter now stands I hold to my previous convictions tbat bis opposition to Mr Ormond is nothing short of an insult to the intellect of the community.— I am, &c,, Fquint. November 22,1881.