THE STOUT-SEDDON STRUGGLE.

Mount Ida Chronicle, Volume 24, Issue 1227, 1 June 1893, Page 3

THE STOUT-SEDDON STRUGGLE.

TO THE EDITOR. Sik, —For a considerable time you have been writing backing up our.member in imputing unworthy motives to our public men, who have beeii 'administering the affairs of the colony, and under whose administration the colony has made good progress. In your issue of the 25th ins.t./you have reached a waster-piece- of' unfair assumption and unsupported assertion. You allege that two of our most abie and patriotic men are scrambling against each other for the " prize "'(?) of the office ofPremiership ; and. the whole tone of your article imputes the most selfish and unpatriotic motives 10 those two gentlemen.

Mr Seddon is not so.-well known in these parts as is Sir Robert Stout; hut it requires a courage hardly human to assert that Sir Robert would split up the party by taking part in a selfish scramble for office. That Mr Seddon has the right and the ability for the office I do not doubt—this is Sir George Grey's opinion.—and he did not require to make " a bold move and the game was iu his hands." He simply required to' do his duty, and he. did it. , Of course, it.is simply, wasting time attemptiug to reply "to the arguments contained in" your leader. It did not contain any. It only contained ungenerous assertions of what you profess to see as facts. The style is not new to you. You have imputed similar motives to the statesman who has just gone. We have heard that gentleman denounced from the public platform hi Nassby by our member as " a political marauder who periodically set out on fjllilrastering expeditions against the people of New Zealand," and he had your support in doing'so; and yet the whole press of the colony, with one or two exceptions, such as yourselves, speak of the man's characteristics as unselfish, patriotic, sincere, and devoted to duty. Was it political bigotry that presented the people of Nasetiy from paying due honour to the dead Premier ? If it was I lay the charge at your door of fostering that spirit by the persistent imputation of unworthy motives to these who are opposed to you politically. I considered for some time whether Ishnuld challenge your article, and there are several reasons why I should not have done so. First, it is little use remonstrating with those who, having few virtues to belaude in their own man think that they will still keep him to the front'by imputing vices to his opponents. The man who cannot rise in this world without knocking his fellows down is—well, "a limited cuss." Then, it is little use appealing for reason to Mr Scobie Mackenzie's audience—those, who believe him when he says "you are ■'far 4oo'intelligent, gentlemen " —thoy have not got room to believe any more. Then the honourable clearheaded men of your own party know just the object of such writing, and I rather doubt if they approve the method, and our party despise it with the contempt it deserves. For those reasons I should take no notice of your leaders. But there is one other reason that prompts me to act otherwise, and that'is the effect such writing will have upon the rising generation if allowed to go unchallenged. Is it healthy doctrine to teach that the mau who holds the highest public position in the colony is a sordid, selfish, ambitious man, who sacrifices the public good for self aggrandisement ?

The effect of that sort of teaching was to be seen written upon ooe of your " extras " announcing the Premier's death—" a good job, too." This no doubt was written by some thoughtless youth who thought that he was expressing the sentiments of the local powers that lie—powers that did not even take the trouble to mark in any way the sad event of the Premier's death. The difference with jjir Harry Atkinson was conspicuous. They did then what decency demanded, recognised the eveut of a statesman's death and loss to his country by closing their places of busiuess for a time, and by lowering the flags to halt-mast, but they could not afford to do that for Premier Ballauce. Can the intelligent audience nob rise above this sort of thing? The "chicken may come home to roost " some day, when you will have your children telling you ' that after all your trouble and care for them, you were actuated by selfish motives. Iu conclusion, Mr Editor, if we cannot afford to be generous, do let us try to be just.—l am, &c, A Young New Zeaiander.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —Having had my attention called to your leader on the above subject, I may mention I have forwarded copies of it to the Premier and Sir Robert Stour. Those gentlemen may ormay not take notice of aseurrilous attack founded on a number of unworthy motives, which, without one tittle of evidence, and solely ouo of- your own inner consciousness, you have chosen to impute to two of the most, prominent men in the colony. This n>ethod of attack savours strougly of America. It has never taken any root whatever amongst" respectable journals in Great Britain. I was, therefore, surprised to see it indulged in by the Chronicle. However, it may just happen that the gentlemen in question may be of the opinion that both the manner and the matter of your article are so contemptible as to be beneath criticism.—l am, &c, Fairplay. Naseby, May 29th, 1893. «.