THE H.B. TRIBUNE MONDAY, MARCH 4, 1929 “ARCADES AMBO,”

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XIX, Issue 65, 4 March 1929, Page 4

THE H.B. TRIBUNE MONDAY, MARCH 4, 1929 “ARCADES AMBO,”

This, being freely interpreted, means that they are “a beautiful pair.” The reference is made—it is just as well to be specific—to the two Napier dailies, the “Hawke’s Bay Herald” and the “Daily Telegraph.” Of the morning paper we had, with fair warrant, formed the opinion that it held a proper conception of what journalistic duty and journalistic justice demanded. Of the evening paper we had formed the opinion l — well we shall leave it to its own readers to decide for themselves what 6th er opinion than the one we hold we could possibly have upon the evidence itself almost daily affords. There can thus be nothing bfit surprise at finding the morning paper joining with the evening emanation in what is little short of a vilification, wholly unjustified, of a man who holds a prominent place in the public life not only of Hawke’s Bay, but of .the Dominion. There can be no one more astonished than ourselves at the “Herald” thus demeaning itself. In this morning’s editorial column the “Herald” makes the following statement: “The chairman of the fNapier] Harbour Board recently announced his belief that the .movement in favour of centralisation [of shipping] did not start with the shipping companies, but with the Government.” On this it proceeds to what is no doubt intended as a “scathing indictment” —the parrot-like phrase of the journalist of scanty vocabulary—of Mr. dull. With its contents and purpprt we need not concern ourselves just now, since, on the “Herald’s” own showing, all this wordy fabric is built up on a false foundation. As we did with its comrade in arms, we shall .quote frbm its own report of the Board’s proceedings, during which this statement is said to have been made. Here is what, according to the “Herald” itself, Mr. dull actually said on this subject-. - i am perfectly eonvineeu that all these statements about the centralisation of shipping are as dead as Caesar. ... It is my opinion that it is the Marine arid Railway Departments who are primarily responsible for the promulgation of this scheme, not tb« shipping companies They are not in favour of it, hnt the Railway and Marine Departments are. Their reports are indicative of the trend of feeling of Ihe departmental officers. . . . I am quite satisfied the present Government will [not]* allow the present activities to be pursued.” * This word “not’’ does not appear in the “Herald's” report, hut this omission is obviously! a typographical error, as the word appears in the re-

ports furnished both by the “Tribune’’ and the “Telegraph.” If it is not to be assigned to this cause, then the “Herald” has not only misrepresented Mr. Jull, but has also misreported him. From this it is manifest that Mr. Jul! made no charge against the Government, either past or present, of being implicated. What he said, and quite unequivocally was that the departments and the departmental heads were behind the movement —quite a different thing. No doubt it is to our good serves that the “Herald” writer refers as “repeating with parrotlike fidelity anything Mr. Jull likes to say.” Neither Napier paper has the courage to mention the “Tribune” by name, but, in this case, we are quite prepared to fit the cap to our own head. On the other hand, will the “Herald”— as it must, if it has any regard for the truth and for decent journalism —now openly admit that, far from showing “parrot-like fidelity” or any other kind of fidelity, it has, for the purpose of misrepresenting him to its readers, twisted Mr lull’s words entirely away from their obvious meaning and signifiance! Furthermore, the tropical bird is primed to speak again, and a little more fully. On another page of this issue will be found—again quoted “with parrot-like fidelity” —a series of extracts from official reports that go pretty conclusively to show what full justification Mr. Jull had in what he said about the “departments.” The “Herald” says the quotation from the 1924 report of the secretary of the Marine Department had no application to Napier, “which is one of the largest exporting centres in the Dominion.” We have plenty more in reserve to show that this “ department ” had Napier in special view. In the meantime, we should, among the extracts given, like to draw special attention to that which gives the views on centralisation of Mr. J. B. Waters, afterwards a member of the Royal Commission, on whose report the Napier papers hung all their hopes, but which condemned Hawke’s Bay to doing without any decent harbour “for at least ten or fifteen years.” It gives some sort of idea of the “open mind” with which that gentleman, at any rate, approached his duties as a commissioner. Finally, we would note that wh-j; we may call a “hired assassin” came into the fight in the “Herald’s” columns last Saturday in the shape of its funny man. From behind the hedge, this gentleman let go at Mr. Jull in connection with a statement of his which the “Herald” has never had the courtesy or the courage to publish, though it. gave under “scare” heading all the disparaging remarks which other members of the Board had to make about it. Even the “Daily. Telegraph” —no doubt driven to it by what the “Tribune” had to say—did eventually publish Mr. lull’s statement. Characteristically enough, without Leading or anything else to draw attention to it, it was buried beneath thrbequarters of a column of its own wearisome stuff, and so was probably not seen by any but a very few of its readers. Still, it can salvo its not over-tender journalistic conscience with the fact, that it did publish the statement. In conclusion it is worth while noting particularly that these attacks upon a public man’s reputation are being made during his absence elsewhere on public duty, so that he has no chance of making the immediate reply they demand. At the same 'time, of course, they are being issued while members of the new Cabinet are in the neighbourhood, no doubt in the hope of prejudicing them against him. "A beautiful pair,” indeed.