The Footbridge.
[TO THE EDITOR.] Sir, —Mr Sandlant says I am all wrong, and is cruel enough to bint that I have been blown off into space by that same potency whose magnetic influence has operated upon the Mayor with such a silent force that hia inner consciousness has come within the radius and resulted in hia subsidence. To take up arms against Mr Sandlant is like trying to use a crowbar to force over a big boulder—you are in danger of having the whole structure toppling back and crushing right down upon you, but you may have a chance by keeping cool, and not being dismayed by the ponderous projection of big words. I must apologise to him for having misunderstood the position he takes up in the matter. If all are agreed that there shall be a fair contribution all round, then let it be hands across at once—and money planked down. Nothing more is wanted. But I am suspicious Mr Sandlant is the exception, not the rule, on the other side. I am afraid his legal opinion would be dear even at the small price of nothing if it were acted upon. Without Mr Sandlant's direct disclaimer, I do not see how bis own words about a mandamus could be construed into anything else but a threat—he put it plainly enough that if what he wants done la not done, they will resort to extreme action. I again repeat that if Mr Sandlant’a own writings are intended to be taken seriously, either the Mayor acted in a way quite unbefitting his position, or the Councillors acted in a most boorish manner. I am glad that It is denied that any such inference was intended, but the talk about a glamor of consequence comes with bad grace from one making such denial. However, Ido not want to concern myself as the champion of anyone—the Mayor, I assume, wants no champion, and members of the Press are usually well able to take care of themselves. All I wish to do is to give a friendly warning of a possible future development. I do not think I need even give the Editor a pat of butter, and I certainly would not admit that he is willing to give fairplay if I were also to accuse him of publishing reports that are the outcome of toadyism.—l am, etc., Borough.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GSCCG18910214.2.16
Bibliographic details
Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume IV, Issue 570, 14 February 1891, Page 2
Word Count
398The Footbridge. Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume IV, Issue 570, 14 February 1891, Page 2
Using This Item
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.