Brothers in Arms.

Hastings Standard, Issue 138, 5 October 1896, Page 4

Brothers in Arms.

A writer in the Evening News, under the heading of " Straight Talk" fires the following squib in a smartly written article : I was having a chat with a News man the other day. What, interviewing the News ? No ; I just dropped in for a chat, but I can tell you 1 heard something that astonished me. What was that: they're are not going to shut up shop, are they ? (}ii no. They seem to be pretty busy. They've got a good many friends. Well, they deserve to have. Not afraid to lash out and give a straight opinion on public matters while the other two Don't mention them. One has got the Seddon blight, and the other is harmless, harmless. But you were going to tell me about the News. What's their trouble ? Just about one of the most scandalous tilings I have heard of. It appears that the paper is under a regular system of boycott. No fear, '■ boycott" is not a familial' term in Napier. Familiar or not the facts exists. But who are the boycotters ? Well, if you will allow me I will toll viiu shortly what the News man informed me. lie said that there were a large number of institutions about here which boycotted the News regularly. Amongst them he mentioned the Hawke's Bay Agricultural Society— But surely it would not pay an institution like the Agricultural Society— I tell you the News people have asked the secretary for a share of the good things time after time, but have been refused, notwithstanding that even the smallest country papers of the " right color" are given "ads." a,I libitum. Last year the secretary promised to put something in the way of the News. They got I'l worth of advertising. This year they are to get nothing. But surely it must cost them a good deal in expenses to lvport the show for the information of the public? Of course it d.oes. But this is not an isolated instance. The same remark applies to the llawke's Bay Jockey Club. The News is rigorously shut out while the other papers get the fat. All the other papers ? Well, no, there is one exception, that of the Hastings Stanoakd. The proprietors of that well-printed and smartly-written little journal had the misfortune to incur the displeasure of some of our little tin gods at the inception, and worst of all, has steered a liberal-independent- course during its career. Quite enough. No "ads." from the Agricultural Society, no "ads." from the Jockey Club, no I " ads." from the Bating Club. Wrong | color. But the Hastings SrAxr>Aiu> is right ! slap down in the middle of all the fun. It naturally falls right into the hands of all the agricultural folk. Can't help it. Not subservient enough, doesn't crawl enough. " All our advertising arrangements are made," is the stereotyped reply to all requests for a share of" the printing. _ That sounds mighty like the " spoils to the victors" cry which Captain Russell, Mr Ormond. > t h"r, are continually raising about the Government. Yes, but Captain liussell, Mr Ormond, ft hor, are prominent members of at least two of the committees mentioned. Of course they are. That's the comical part of it. But the boycott being carried on by Captain liussell, Mr Ormond, ft }>•>,-, of course it cannot be other than 011 high moral grounds. Look here, sonny, it strikes me pretty forcibly, that it's a good job king Dick is on top, and t'other fellows underneath. Otherwise this fine country of ours wouldn't be worth living in. You're right. I can recollect a time when they were on top. I can remember who fattened 011 it too. The working mail didn't, and he's a blessed fool if he gives them another show with the reins, even if land grants, and other " spoils to the victors " are not as plentiful as they were.