“Twas a Glorious Victory.”

Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume III, Issue 394, 21 December 1889, Page 3

“Twas a Glorious Victory.”

,10 THS XDITOB.) Sin,—lt might be the proper thing to excuse anything that may be uttered by a self-con-fessed political novice, but if Mr Arthur will not be content to graciously accept the victory conferred upon him by his blockvoting friends in the vicinity of Sir George Whitmore's run—if be is not satisfied with such a high testimonial of friendship, but needs must establish a kind of political guerilla warfare, he must not be offended if his opponents turn to have one more smile at him. While, for the sake of form, it is perhaps proper to con gratulate him on the possession of sixty staunch friends up the coast —many of whom no doubt never before heard his name, and could only have acquired the friendship by a mutual understanding between them and their lords and masters—one cannot help the possession of a feeling of tender compassion for Mr Arthur. Being a political novice, he is probably unaware of the seriousness of insulting a great body of electors — publicly accusing those electors of having voted against their “ better consciences ” That phrase is one which has possibly been produced through the meagre vocabulary which Mr Arthur has at command, and which at times leads him to make a most unenviable exhibition of himself. If it is not doing Mr Arthur an inj ustice, and for the better understanding ot your readers, I would take the liberty of conveying into plain language what I believe he means. It is that six hundred and twenty four electors voted against what they believed to be the right—that they voted for Mr Rees knowing that he had, with an air of sincerity, made promises he never iotended to fu'fil. Of course those six hundred and twenty four

electors who voted for Mr Rees and won the day — only that Sir George Whitmore, that brilliant General, mirshalled Mr Arthur’s loving and affectionate Coast friends, and with the exception of one man who was not afraid to record his convictions, voted for that gentleman—will now hide their heads in vary shame, humiliated at the opinion which Mr Arthur has expressed concerning them. I hops Mr Arthur believed that he was telling the truth when he said that no undue influence was used to get electors to vote against Mr Bees; for I know him to be wrong. It was like his impudence to talk as he did about the forthcoming election, for many people voted for him in the belief that no good or harm could be done by sending him to Wellington for one session, and he only got in by pandering to the Whitmore clique, and while using expressions that were not complimentary to them, promised he would not endeavor to have the injustice removed. Mr Bees had the manliness to make a distinct promise that he would try and get justice done in this respect, and it was because Whitmore and Co. knew the man had snob great ability and could bring such tremendous influence to bear in a just causa, that all taut -one "man joined to upset the verdict of the majority iu Other parts of the district. When the people come to see the game that has been worked by the Whitmore contingent—and worked so often too—they will have no more of this sort of thing. It may suit Mr Arthur's book to try and gull the Gisborne people by s >ying that every elector but one in the Waiapu district is his personal friend, because that was where he had resided. The truth' is that he has spent over and over more time in the Poverty Bay swell Club than ho ever resided on the Coast, I believe I will not be far wrong whet) I say that about thirteen years ago he resided up the Coast for a few months, and then went home to England on the absentee squatter advertisement racket. Not only that but he has had managing his ran a person who was made a JP. under circumstances which the Tploga Biy people know something about. Any sensible person can judge of th? “ truth 1’ of Mr Arthur’s statements when they remember that on the vast runs monopolised by Whitmore, Ormond, and others there are shepherds living a lonely life, without the ohanoe of knowing anything about what goes on even in the little coastal towns, and I hope I can only accuse Mr Arthur of vanity and not of deliberate falsehood in saying that such mon are his personal friends. He has the front to add an additional insult to Mr Rees' sunporters by expressing the belief that they will become turncoats at next general election, and he tells the glaring untruth that there area great many electors who will ride fifty miles to ths polling booths to vote for hilt). The most ill informed person in the district knows that in no part of it doos fifty miles separate one polling booth from another. Possibly Mr Arthur may bo referring to the dual voters whom it was proposed to make use of in the same way that the Coast people have been, bat if he were not so iguornt of politics he would know that Sir George Grey's Act preventing that sort of thing will bo in force before next election. • '■ ' I hope, sir, I have not intruded too much on your space, but I think it is only fair some one should reply to the gross misstatements made behind Mr Rees' back. I wonld like to add, for the information of the eleotors. a few remarks made by Mr frank Arthur after tjie election, but I am afmid you would nbt oan to publish them, though if made generally iMoWn they Would do mnoh to remove the sealos from people's eyes.—X am, etc,, yof A