TO THE ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF AUCKLAND.

New Zealander, Volume 10, Issue 865, 29 July 1854, Page 3

TO THE ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF AUCKLAND.

Fii lay, J> ly ‘B. 18H. Fku.ow Cni7.i v.', — The Southern f.ioss of this morning contains the following in a portion of its edi'o rial column'', " We are told l>y w ay of advertisement in the New Z, chmder of Wednesday last that cutain of our Fellow Cithens signed a memorial to the Horae Governnient in IBM, praying that Sir George Grey's Municipal Charter, might be disallowed, because oj the liberality of the franchise which it bestowed. This statement, made for electioneering purposes is utterly untrue, the petition in question does not contain one syllable to that effect.” As the foregoing is neither more nor lass than an evasive side wind attempt, not only to explain away the statement contained in the advertisement— but also to convey, at the same time, a contradiction to one of a si r ilar kind made by myself at the Public Meeting on Saturday Evening, I am sure every one who wishes to arrive at ihe truth will juitify me in answering the same—on the principle if you will, that what is sauce for the goo«e is sauce for the gander. In setting out tlmn I would beg to ask the gentleman who conducts the Cross to point out if be can iu what part of the said advertisement it say* — “ that certain of our Fellow Citizens signed a memorial Seel” If he will just take the tro tble to refresh his memory, by returning to it again—he will find that Mr. Hugh Carleton does not exactly designate them by the same terms. He says that, which we ourselves ki e-v to he true at the time, or at least in a very few hours after it had been written, submitted, and signed. ‘‘Tin t it was confined to a small circle of those who were considered leading men ” There is certainly so far as argument goes—a material, yea, 3 striking difference between the description of the signers given by Mr. Hugh Corleton,.and the one which is contained in tie Southern Gross of yesterday, simply because the q- eition naturally suggests itself to the homst enquiring mind in search of truth as to — who are the lending men 1 Dr. O'Neill repudiates the idea in the House of Representatives. By a comparison of the article of the Cross of Friday last with the one of yesterday—and with Mr. Carleton'ft description of the signers of the petition, am! knowing as we do too well, the elevated position in which Mr. William Brown ranks in that writer’s estimation, it is not a straining of the matter, ‘nor a far-fetched or illogical deduction, to conclude that Mr. William Brown did sign the said private petition. Mr. Hugh Carhton believes in “ leading men.” The Southern Cross believes in third-rate men of a coarser mould.’' In which class, then, is Mr. William Brown to be ranked I Why of course amongst the u small circle of those who a re considered as leading men.” If then he belongs to the latter class he must have signed the petition, as it would have been tantamount to an insu't not to have solicited him to have done so —but rather as a matter of fem/erfthip for his name to have been at the head of the list. And I would beg to ask, need there be so much beating about the bush? Either he did, or he did not sign it? And if he did not it would have been very easy to have el-eared his character by declaring as publicly—that he did not. -Mr. William Brown could have told us in as few words—what he knew about it, and what part he iiimsel: took in it. The writer, whoever he may bo, is not quite up to the truth when he sta es that the petition appeared in the Southern Cross at the time. It did not come out till so ne considerable time after, and when it did appear they lorpol to publish’ the signal ores which had been attached to if. Besides at the time spoken of, there were hut very few indeed who knew of its existence. I got my inhumation from one of the so called loading men who signed it —and what was most creditable both to his head and his bean—ho very shortly after bitterly repented of wl at he had done. ■ And having expressed such repentance is my reason for not having dragged it to light before. The shuilling manner in which the Cross evades the question after Mr. William Brown’s invitation to test his political career for thirteen years past, does not show a very candid desire of investigation when it says the statement is made for electioneering purposes I At times I have mentioned this to parties who have felt so utterly astonished, that they have immediately gone to inquire into the troth or falsehood of the statement from Mr. Wil iam Brawn’s politicol-electioneering-fighiing-general who, of course at once and without the least hesitation swore it was a - lie and following it up with another oath, the tendency of which was to impress his interrogator with the conviction that such a petition never had an existence ! Three o! the parties who have put this question to him pointully, have reeeiv d the same polite answer ** that it was a —— lie.’ Again, why should it be confined to a small cii-clt* of hading men? And what will he say now that the Cioss admits of its existence ?/ These repeated emphatical denials have been met in ibe Cm ss of ibis morning, why 1 ask again sheuld italic kept to a few of the lea ling men, unless the object of the signers was

such ns would serve the few to the injury of the many 1 Why ? Jf not to increase the power of the few great property hoi 'ers hy curtailing the rigl is and privileges of the producers ? If it was meant for aonn thin ' honourable, fair, and above board, wby, observe such privacy ? I Leg to ask whether it was not meant by the corcoctors ns a most effectual stab in the dark. And if the Cress feels inclined to answer this question, let it tell us who signed it —so that vve may know the “ leading men” from ffiu “ third rate men.” if it was ft petition good for the people why was it kept such a secret, and confided only to a few I It was very like the vanity of the concoctor to imagine that he and his “ few” would be known to Royalty as “ leading men !” ]f the object and intention of this email circle was at that time the general benefit of the ciitEens —if they were desirous of acting as the true and f-iilhful guardians of their rights and liberties—why was not more publicity given to their proceedings — why was Ultra no advertisements in our local japers convening mic i meeting—and why was not such meeting held i i one of our large rooms? If it w.is so important to our interests, and so necessary to get rid of some great and crying evil to the community at large, why no* have put such machinery to work as would procure not merely a few, but at least 520 signatures to it in order to give it a greater appearance of weight and authenticity. How comes it too in these times of exactness that the same documeut was published without a faih-r to own the bantling? Surely we might have supjmsed that the man who had shown such an inclination to ferret out letters, despatches, &c. f connected with the Blood and Treasure and Mission.ry I.an<i questions would have felt a pleasure in dragging this hole an 4 corner—this private busumas before the public. We hnd plenty about the Blood and Treasure Dispatch and the Governor’s letter to the Bishop? why not give us a little about the private and the amall circle business before ? The Cross of this morning wishes to make the public believe that what the Advertisement sti'ei was utterly untrue. What does he mean to say is untrue ? Does he mean to deny that the leading men of whom Mr. William Brown is one did not sign the petition ? Does he mean to assert that those who really did do so—were not persuaded to do so on account of the liberahty of the franchise? If so, on this hangs the gist of the argument. Neither the advertisement nor my own remarks conveyed the idea, that such were embodied in the ■ id petition—but 1 would here beg to ask whether the parties themselves hava not admitted that the liberality to the pensioners in particular and to tne working classes generally was the reason why they wished the charter disallowed? As fair, open, and plain a way of getting to know how Mr. William Brown was disposed towards this private working against ihe franchise is by examining the policy of the Southern Cross of which he holds the power if he pleases to either ship or unship at the shortest notice. Every one at all observant of passing evei ti knows how much his paper resisted the introduction of the charter—and how it labouied to defeat and break i' down. We have only to turn to the files of that journal, and read the leaders of that time—that is during the introduction of the charter—to find evidence plentifully strewed— ‘‘ as plentiful as black-berries.” ,1 shall then proceed to lay a few before my readers —so, that those who think for themselves—and only support and follow men only so far as they maintain and stick to principle, may form their own. conclusipnsYou hardy sons of Britain read the following tit-bit which appeared in the Southern Cnm. ,l While commenting upon the new and extraordinary feature of Governor Grey's free Municipal Institutions, vii., the delegating of four-fifths of the power of taxing tlia general community to a military class—whom he virtually exempts from the paying taxes, we cninot silently pass over the same privilege, equally objectionable in point of principle, though incapable ia practice —of being offensively exercised —which has been conferred upon the aborigines.” It appears evident from die above that the gentlemen conducing the Southern Cross were most strenuously ofipo.-e 1 to tho pmsioners having the right to vote under the charter—but for what reason I a:n not able to divine, unless they were composed ot English, Irish, and Scotchmen—for, the grounds ostensibly paraded as the reason, were no grounds at all, for the pensioners were then, and likely 1 1 continue subject to taxation. “ But worst of all we are saddled with a monster unknown to English justice ' Representation without taxation.’ Military servitude of the pensioners keeping them for some years from possession of their acres and cottages, so that in perfect despite of clause o both of the right hand and of the left, the pensioners axe cornmen led by our Governor-in-Cbiel to out number the population and wealth of Auckland in the proportion of four to three.” But mark the consistency of the Cross, that while it cries out lustily against the poor p naion°rs :t appears to lake much pleasuie,yea, is quite at home in vindicating and admiring the manner in which the right had been given to the aborigines of New Zealand. 1 raise no complaints at its exultation on this point, but 1 do think it ought not to appear to grieve because the Governor bad thought that his own coun'rymen ougl t to enjoy the same rights and privileges as t lie natives. But here are his own words which have received no c louring of mine. "We are well sitisfied to see that the elective franchise has in this instance been conferred upon them; because it tends to amalgamate the races, and encourages the natives to a more lively participation in the feelings and interests of the Europeans."— Southern Cross, September 9th, 1651. “ The people must speedily give proof of what materials they are made, whether they will quietly submit to the injustice of having their pockets emptied by any persons upon whom the ohaiter may confer the power; —whether they will take the intermediate course of complying with the preliminary requirements of the m-asure, in the vain hope of expecting « mall minority to t ijhience or control a powerful majority, and thus lend countenance and weight to its decisions; — or whether, on the other hand, they will make a stand upon principle, repudiating the measure for its unEnglish— and unjust provisions and steadfastly refuse to have anything to do wish it.”— Southern Cross, September 9th, 1851. *' The argument for accepting the Charter because of the political power which, it is assumed, it will confer, of bringing effectively the wants and wishes of the people before the government, was scarcely to have been expected to be so forcibly dwelt upon as an advantage by the New Zealander. — Southern Cross, Friday, October 10. To the Editor of the “ Southern Cross.” Sir, —While I agree with you in opinion as to the fallacious nature of the so called municipal institutions which Sir George Grey has imposed on the community and their utter inapplicability to the requirements of the Auckland district, I confess to differing wi;h you as to the manner in which they ought to be dealt with; you would have the introduction resisted by available means, I, on the contrary, would quietly give war, and seek to render them as little mischievous as po-s.ble. If tltev could be effectually opposed you would be right beyond a doubt in so doing; but, desp ta your unnost endeavours, some will be found to vote and some to accept. Make the best of what cannot be helped, see that the Council be composed, if possible, of men c f chaiacter, who will at least be content to do no harm. The leading men should profess their willingness to accept the office in self-defence; if they suffer men of no standing to be elected it will cost them dear. Men of little or no property will be well pleased to laytxorbitant taxes on those who have much; for the taxing party will enjoy the benefit of that revenue when expended on public works without having contributed. Possibly they may keep within bounds, but the experiment ist; o dangerous to risk. And unless the leading men come to an understanding among each other, and exert themselves actively to secure the return of only such as are well qualified for office, the town Council will be of an anomalous, end therefore untrustworthy character. No one can guess unless exertion be made beforehand, what names will issue from the Returning officer’s basket. I should bo sorry to see the community suffer, even for the sake of holding up a Grey proclamath n more effectually to ridicule. A3y advice is this —to petition the Home Government, piaying immediate relief from the inculms; and, pending the answer, to see that as IFttle harm as possible be done. M ITMKOS. From the information I received from one of the signers, from reading tho hj ading article of the Southern Cross” from the arguments made use of at that time, about property being represented instead of those who produce it—and from reading the letter of “ Aletcikos” who 1 was informed drew up tße private petition, I must say that 1 have always believed and am yet of the same opinion, that the opposition to the Municipal Charter by the signers of the petition —the “ Southern Cross” and “ Metoikos” was because of the liberality of the franchise. If 1 am mistaken lam the more unfortunate in not b-ing able to understand plain English, —I am, fellow Colonists, your obedient Servant, Wm. Gnirrix. P,S. —Governor Grey was no idler—nor mere “distributor”—be was a *■ hard-working man,” and by dint of perseverance reaped the reward of bis industry in the high eminence to which be .attained. To him whom the “ few leading men” delighted to exhibit as a “ despot” the community of Auckland were indebted for the very freedom of which these “few leading men,” with liberty on their lip, but true despotism at heart, would have deprived them—and 1 believe would still deprive them if they had the power.