TO THE EDITOR. Sir,— There has been an attempt to discredit Mr R. Goad, who is on a lecturing tour under tho auspices of the New Zealand Alliance, which, I see, has reached Southern papers through the Press telegrams, by parading him as a Home Ruler. I enclose a letter which 1 have forwarded to the ‘ New Zealand Herald,’ and which I shall feel obliged if you will republish, I can repeat what I state in that letter: that I was at all his meetings except one, and never heard a syllable from him which would justify the assertions of the ‘Herald’s ’ writer.—l am, etc., William Fox,
The writer of “ Local Gossip ” in your supplement of Saturday has a paragraph on Mr Coad which not only misrepresents that gentleman and is absolutely untrue, but is calculated, and apparently intended, to prejudice the mind of Southern readers against him and the cause of local option, which he advocates. The writer (“Mercutio”) states that Mr Coad “ muddled up a temperance mission with his views on the faction fighting and party politics of the Old Country; and that he has by his own indiscretion done more to discredit his mission down South than all tho brewers and licensed v ctuallers’ associations put together. Already telegrams have been received from the South desiring to know whether this roan is an Alliance Temperance lecturer or a Home Rule advocate. Before Mr Coad reaches the Bluff ho will have appteciaied the melancholy truth that politics, like misfortunes, make a man acquainted with strange bedfellows.” In reply to this very unjust criticism will you allow me to state that Mr Coad did not in any one of his addresses make the smallest allusion to Homo Rule or any other faction fighting or party politics in the Old Country. Ho never once in any way, directly or impliedly, “muddled up his temperance mission ” with such topics. _ The charge against him is absolutely without foundation. Tho only ocoa-ion on which Mr Coad publicly (if it could be so called) even alluded to Home Rule was in his reply to an invitation smt to him by the Auckland Horae Rule Committee (which he told mo was not intended for publication), in which, declining their invitation, ho intimated his belief that Mr Gladstone would “return to power at next election. and that Homo Rule, such us would satisfy the best people in Ireland, would be granted much sooner than many, people in the colony believed ” Just before Mr Coad left Auckland I had a long conversation with him on the subject, and he assured mo that all the Home Rule be expected or wished for was that Ireland should have precisely the same local self-government as England, Wales, or Scotland; and that he had no sympathy with tho demand for a separate Irish Parliament or any measure which might lead to separation. I suppose there are very few persons Worth or South in New Zealand who do not hold the same opinion, and the Southern readers of “ M»rcutie’s ” alarmist warning may be satisfied that Mr Coad neither has muddled nor will muddle up his mission with any question foreign to the main obj-ct of local option, of which he has been a life-long advocate.—l am, eto William Fox.
Permanent link to this item
AN EXPLANATION., Evening Star, Issue 8008, 10 September 1889
AN EXPLANATION. Evening Star, Issue 8008, 10 September 1889
Using This Item
Allied Press Ltd is the copyright owner for the Evening Star. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons New Zealand BY-NC-SA licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Allied Press Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.