Untitled

Marlborough Express, Volume V, Issue 218, 26 February 1870, Page 3

Ayr anonymous writer in the News, under the pseudonym of “ Cui Bono,” appears anxious to draw us into a controversy with respect to the late Election for Blenheim, and particularly that for Tua Marina. With this object we are accused of drawing conclusions “ as usual, with little honesty or truth ;” to have the object of shewing that the recent prorogation was “justifiable;” and of “ leaving it to be inferred that Mr. H. Dodson lost his election because a better and abler man was preferred !” These are by no means all the charges brought or insinuated, but with a view to the Future, rather than by useless and irritating discussion, to prevent the due consideration of larger and more important questions, we shall allude but as briefly as possible to the Elections, which now belong to the irrevocable Past, or the charges so rudely brought against us. We shall therefore reiterate that Mr. H. Dodson did inform numerous persons that if elected, it was his intention to vote for Mr. Eyes, and with such understanding many voted for him, therefore it was a legitimate argument to reckon, as we did, all votes for him conjoint with Mr. Robinson as in favor of Mr. Eyes. We need not reply to the charge of “ little honesty or truth,” because our conduct has been before the public for the past four years, during which we, are conscious of having spoken very plainly ; still we confess to being but human, and consequently

\ liable to slight errors in judgment occasi- | onally. We have however acted in perfect | good faith at all times, and we defy “ Cui | Bono,” whose personnel is known to us, to | prove the contrary; the only thing on our | conscience is the publication once of nearly | half a column of small type, written with | the object of clearing him of a charge laid against him of—to put it mildly—misleading his political friends. We have never said a word in defence of Mr. Eyes’ prorogation of the Council, nor shall we now. Neither do we believe “ a better or more able man” was brought against Mr. H. Dodson, which is saying nothing to the detriment of Mr. Blick. On the contrary, we hold that Mr. Henry Dodson is an honor to Blenheim and the Wairau, taking as he alw a y s has done, an active part in all movements for its welfare, and a keen interest in the promotion of local industry; and the town shewed its appreciation of his good qualities by •raising him to a much higher

position, that of its Mayor. With reference to Tua Marina, what we stated was a very mild version—given without any expression of opinion—of what was commonly and publicly stated on the spot. As to our opinions in respect to Mr. Eyes’ fitness for the Superintendency, we presume our office as conductor of a newspaper does not prevent our speaking on his behalf, since “ Cui Bono” sees no wrong in expressing his views on the other side. Lastly, once and for all, the covert hints and insinuations of that person notwithstanding we have not been, nor shall we be, a party '-o any “ tricks” or “ dodges” on the part of any candidate, any more than we shall to a determined breach of the law, without pausing to consider whether to expose and oppose it will be of good to anyone. And at this point we take the opportunity of stating publicly, as we have privately, that when Mr. Eyes has been rejected by the Council, whose place it now is to elect a Superintendent —or he withdraws from the candidature —then we shall look round for the next best man, and go in for him with equal consideration, and without prejudice j nor shall wo give a factious opposition to whoever may be elected, whether it be Mr. Coulter, Mr. Seymour, or any other gentleman.