The New Zealand Times (PUBLISHED DAILY). THURSDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1881.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 6438, 1 December 1881, Page 2

The New Zealand Times (PUBLISHED DAILY). THURSDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1881.

The result of yesterday’s election for the Mayoralty places the city in a position never before realised. The newly-elected Chief Magistrate in assuming office has yet to win the codfidence and respect of the great majority of his fellow-citizens. Four hundred and forty-six ratepayers declared yesterday in Mr Fisher's favor, seven hundred and seventy-three expressed their mistrust of his professions and voted against him. He has been elected by the votes of a section of the community not generally evincing, by many degrees, the interest in municipal elections displayed yesterday, and he decidedly has against him all those who have the best practical knowledge of municipal affairs. We have before reverted to the lamentable apathy among leading citizens in respect to taking an active interest in the public business of the city, and they Lave now to reflect upon the circumstance that by their apathy the Mayoral chair will he occupied by the person who, above all others, they have least desired to see there. Out of evil may come good; the next contest may see a more healthy feeling manifested, and tho chief honor in the gift of the citizens not treated as scarcely worthy of acceptance. The question now is, Will Mr Fisher rise to the occasion ? He has an opportunity before him of living down reproof and widespread mistrust. No man has ever entered on public office in this city under more inauspicious circumstances than attends Mr Fibhbb’b elevation to the Mayoral

chair. He is neither respected nor confided in by his Councillors, and among the citizens there is a widespread feeling of doubt that bis election has been a grave error. On the other hand, opportunity may make the man; he may, possibly, live down opposition, and show the public that he is capable of better things than he has yet been credited with. Howsoever peculiar his idiosyncraeies and temperament, he has one advantage in the respect the public pay to the office he now holds, and if he is wise he will show by his conduct of public business that he is not unworthy the trust a section of his fellow citizens have reposed in him. The rock which he should avoid is the perpetuation of jealousies and class grievances, and which he has hitherto shown a decided proneness to foment. Messrs Young and Hutchison have in their defeat the consolation of knowing that they and their friends have done what they could. That both depended on a greater share of individual support than they received is evident from the fact that they came to no arrangement for one or the other to withdraw from the contest, and so secure the defeat of the now successful candidate. The result of the election shows the fallacy of trusting to promises of support, and the rottenness of the system which recognises personal touting and canvassing for votes, Mr .Fisher’s Committee openly avowed that they had the promise of 800 votes, and could safely reckon on 600. Mr Young declared that he would win by a majority of at least 200. Mr Hutchison and his supporters, though less demonstrative, still had assurance of a comfortable majority. Tb® votes polled yesterday numbered nearly every ratepayer on the roll, and yet neither of the candidates found all the pledges made to him ratified. We hope that before the next Mayoral elections ensue personal canvassing for votes will be forbidden.