The Gisborne Standard AND COOK COUNTY GAZETTE Published every Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday Morning. Saturday, September 22, 1888. “ALL RIGHT WHEN UNDERSTOOD.”

Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume II, Issue 199, 22 September 1888, Page 2

The Gisborne Standard AND COOK COUNTY GAZETTE Published every Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday Morning.

Saturday, September 22, 1888. “ALL RIGHT WHEN UNDERSTOOD.”

Be just and fear not; Let all the ends thou aim’st at be thy country’s, Thy God's, and truth’s.

Dubins the controversy with regard to the harbor we have dealt very lightly with Mr Graham, knowing full well that when he had passed through the ordeal of his friends’ abuse he would have been fairly well chastised for the wretched bungle for which he is mainly responsible. The quotation “ Damned with faint praise ” would not be expressive of the inclinations of many of Mr Graham's former political supporters. But one blunder does not seem to prevent that gentleman from rushing wildly into others, like the moth does to the candlelight. The moth distinguishes the light soon enough, but unfortunately the light generally extinguishes the moth. After the mistake had been made of letting the Bill go-through, we hear of the member for the district sending to the Chairman of the Harbor Board a reply which wgs hardly polite for one public representative to send to another. The now historical phrase “ All "ight when understood " was about the coolest rebuff we could imagine for a reply to the too inquisitive Chairman ; yet, when the latter's inquiai.*’veneas waa the outcome of anxiety for the public interest, he was at least entitled to a respecttdi reply. Then, on returning to Gisborne, Mr Graham was invited to a special meeting of the KJ»rbor Board, and after a long address about the forms of the House, he admitted in eSect that he did not understand the Aot, nor did the Premier himself. Besult, all right when understood, but no one with the capacity to understand it 1 Then comes the legal opinion, and Mr DeLeutour's elaborate review of the various points of the Act—too elaborate, in fact, for the comprehension of some people: Mr Newman, for instance, has an idea that he could have dons it better himself, which of course we would not think of disputing. In the meantime Mr Graham has quietly ignored his constituents —perhaps in one sense the best course—and now he rushes into print to abuse the Board. The roost amusing part of it is that in doing so, he takes upon himself to give his own interpretation of the Act, and admits that the principle upon which Ormond and Whitmore worked was quite a fair one. This certainly justifies Mr Graham for the part he took in the matter, though it is not likely to satisfy his constituents. As for the interpretation of (be Act we would place more faith in Mr DeLautour’s opinion than in Mr Graham's. But did ever anyone hear of a member of Parliament making .such statements as Mr Graham has done since his return from Wellington ; 11 Since my return I have spoken to a good number of members of the Board and others about the Aot. They pne and all tf.em to be in too irritated a state of mind to take- a calm, dispassionate view of fhf tfPtual position." Bravo, Mr Graham 1 Your constituents are ail wrong and you are right: like petted children they pre crying out because they think they have not got what they ought to get, and like a good nurse, you may gently chastise them. Thera may be “ the devil to pay " fora short time, but nurses that know their business do not mind a little of that, because they are accustomed to jt. If the question were not so serious, Mr Graham’s explanations might be treated as the prime joke of the season. Speaking seriously, he has committed himself to a grave indiscretion which any public representative ought to have more sense than to ritk. Pint he ignores his noastituents,

then he tells them they are too irritated to take a dispassionate view of the position—in fact they are suffering from a species of temporary insanity, and are not accountable for what they do. Any ratioml man will admit that he may at times be in error, but surely Mr Graham must have been in anything but a dispassionate mood when he casts this grave reflection on those who sent him to Parliament. The whole history of this harbor affair, if retailed, would be a poor recommendation of Mr Graham’s political ability : the previous Act was a big blunder, the Amending Act is no better. We think Mr Graham should be asked to explain what he means by the reflection he has cast on a great number of his constituents, who are entitled to be treated with respect, no matter what their opinions may be. When they deserve the insinuation that they are a senseless lot of nincompoops then we say, woe betide the district. A person who displays such weakness in quiet and undisturbed moments is hardly the one to act with reason when he is required to do so in a very critical period.