The Gisborne Standard COOK COUNTY GAZETTE. Published every Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday, Morning. Saturday, December 21, 1889. INTOXICATED WITH GLORY.

Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume III, Issue 394, 21 December 1889, Page 2

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

Saturday, December 21, 1889. INTOXICATED WITH GLORY.

Be Jiut and fear not; Let al) the ends thou aim's! at ba thy aoaatry’t, Thy Cod's, end truth's.

There is a certain class of people who, it is said, will hang themselves if they only get rope enough. We do not mean to insinuate that Mr Arthur is one of that class, but he is certainly a dreadful example of the ease with which a man may commit himself We have previously referred to his want of tact, and yet had we sought proof of this we should not have been able to produce any such illustration as that afforded by Mr Arthur, at the declaration of the poll, on Thursday afternoon.

On such occasions it is usual for the victorious party to eschew for the time being all rivalry, and to treat the defeated with respect. This, however, was not the case on Thursday afternoon, when Mr Arthur made use of the occasion to gratuitously sneer at and abuse Mr Rees behind his back. Of course much cannot be expected from a “ political novice,” but yet one would have thought that it did not require a knowledge of politics for the exercise of ordinary civility, and Mr Arthur has himself to blame if he objects to our referring to him once again, although for our part we should have preferred, the struggle being over, to allow matters to rest m abeyance.

Mr Arthur in the first place accused some six hundred and twenty-three electors of allowing themselves to be induced to vote against their “ better consciences.” We do not pretend to understand the phrase: unfortunately Mr Arthur is not gifted with any great command of language, and this gives him a peculiarity of expression. Possibly had he in his youth taken advantage of debating societies the fault referred to might have been removed. However, from the way in which he expressed the phrase we understand him to mean that six hundred and twenty-three people voted against their convictions. As there were hundreds of others not (upon the roll, but who were ready to vote in the same manner had they been privileged so to do, it is a great compliment to Mr Rees’ powers of speech to say that he could have done what he is charged with doing. But we do not believe he did any such thing. Every man who voted for Mr Rees did so of his own free will, and it is an insult to the intelligence of the majority of the voters in all the settled parts of the community—the town and country districts—to say that they were not able to judge forthemselves which was the better candidate to choose. As to the promises which Mr Arthur asserts were made by Mr Rees, the only promises ever made by him were to the effect that he would strive to do certain things. What he was to endeavor to do was of great importance to the district, notwithstanding that Mr Arthur scoffed at the idea of even attempting to alter a state of affairs which he himself described as iniquitous. Had he any judgment he would see that it is extremely inadvisable at the present time to throw his block vote on the Coast in the teeth of the rest of the electors. Had he but enquired he must have known that there is in the town at any rate a deep feeling of resentment against the manner in which the majority of the uninfluenced electors have been practically disfranchised. Instead of trying to offer some plausible reason why there was such a block vote, Mr Arthur vauntingly boasts of it, and calmly appropriates it as a testimonial of the respectability, good character, and popularity of him, A. C. Arthur. Popularity indeed I We suppose that there is a number of those electors who have never seen Mr Arthur, and many more who never heard his name mentioned until this contest began. It has been the policy of Mr Arthur throughout the election to disclaim any responsibility for the actions of his friends ana supporters; yet oh Thursday he came forward with unexampled coolness and gave his personal assurance that no undue influence had been used during the recent election. We do not object to Mr Arthur making such assertions regarding himself personally, but w,e think he should at least have made enquiries before he jumped to the conclusion that none of his supporters had acted in the way imputed. It would perhaps b# just as well for all parties Ilf that subject were allowed to drop I now that the fight U ovts»

Mr Arthur’s bombast about the next election savors'a good deal of vanity, and we are inclined to believe that even his most staunch supporters will not be pleased at such high falutin’, which reminds us of the humorous incident of a merry showman pompously shouting “ Hi! hi 1 hi! Come along this way I” It is certainly a very undignified attitude for a gentleman who has had conferred upon him the high honor of being the Parliamentary representative of the East Coast District. Nor is Mr Arthur flattering to his own supporters They have gone so far as to take him on trust without the slightest proof of capacity for the position he holds. If the wisdom of those electors should subsequently be proved they will perhaps again have the opportunity of using their own judgment, but if they have any independence at all —if they are not bound to follow like sheep going after the bell-wether—they will be inclined to resent the assertion that they are prepared to pledge themselves for all eternity to a man without having the slightest knowledge of his abilities. Had Mr Arthur been a man who had previously thought fit to devote any of his time to the public service he might be justified in assuming that people would judge him by his public actions, but the facts being as they are his attitude towards his own supporters is one that intelligent men are not likely to appreciate. We are rather sorry that Mr Arthur should persistin renewingpolitical strife, because for the present we consider it the duty of all parties to unite in the common interest. We do not think the electors are likely to appreciate being arraigned before the bar of the infallible judgment of “ I, A. C. Arthur,” and though we hardly expect he will take advice from us, if he is not too conceited to take a hint it would be that he should remain silent and not repeat conduct that may lead to the alienation offriends and admirers, even to those he especially thanked for giving him a block vote.