PUBLIC OPINION.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 6488, 7 April 1908, Page 5

PUBLIC OPINION.

MR ATKINSON AND “JOHN

BUNYAN.”

(To the Editor "N.Z. Times.”)

Sir, —I much regret that my attitude to the Mayoral election should have perturbed the honoured shade of ‘‘John Bunyan” into pronouncing in kindly But severe censure upon me in my “new found character of Mr Facing Botliurays.” Them is obviously nobody better qualified to speak with authority on such a character than the creator of it, but with the utmost deference I venture to suggest that a misunderstanding of the position has led him into an injustice. While declining for the present to join cither candidate’s committee, X have no intention whatever of disfranchising myself in the manner suggested by your correspondent. Not “ facing Bothuays, but “Hearing Bothsides” is, I trust, the correct description of my attitude. After hearing both sides 1 was in hopes of arriving at a definite conclusion, and recording an effective vote. May I add that when J.B. refers to me as “one who was always a valiant henchman of the party,’ - he seems for once to descend to a lower level than what we are accustomed to associate with one of the most exalted of moralists. What on earth has party to do with the business? And if it is any way relevant, which way does it lead? The strange combinations of politicians usually opposed to one another which are to be found on each side of the present contest are surely a guarantee to the most timid as to the most rabid that it is possible to vote on the merits ter once —if one can only find out where they are! I can hardly believe that the immortal author of “Pilgrim’s Progress” would have seemed to be clouding the issue by political “gag” if he had not bien to some extent betrayed by the ea.rthy medium through which his communication must have passed.—l am, A. B, ATKINSON. April 6th. AIR DUTHIEI REPLIED TO. (To the Editor “N.Z. Times.”) Sir,—lt is difficult to understand Mr Duthie’s letter in this morning’s issue. The proposal mud© to widen Willis street up to Mercer street could have been carried out at an estimated expenditure of £14,500. It was against this that Mr Aitken gave his two votes. Mr Duthie is not ingenuous when he attempts to say that his being allowed to build up to street lino did not affect the question. Mr Duthie is very unfortunate in referring to the Heath estate. Let him look up the records and he wifi see that during Mr Aitken’s time it was that the offer made was refused. I had to labour under the difficulty on coming into office of having to find out for myself what had been going on, and had I been earlier informed of the offer made by the Heath estate the matter would not have been allowed to go by default. As to Sir Duthie'.3 extraordinary statement that my publication of the fact that he was and is a director of the “Dominion” is a breach of professional etiquette, I can only express my wonder that a man of such talent could so express himself. X had my knowledge 'in the street; It was a matter of notoriety, and I am astonished to learn that Air Duthie desired that it should be a secret. Mr Duthie surely is hard pushed for something to accuse me of.—l am, etc., T. W. HISLOP. ‘ CHEESE AND BEER.” (To the Editor "N.Z. Times.”) Sir, —You have a correspondent wrdmg under the above heading. 1 shculd judge., from the main ideas he expresses, that his nom de plume was suggested hy the uppermost thought in his mind—choree and beer. To him ii appears to be tbe most glorious and useful phrase in our language, since he begins and cuds his letters with it. He Has endeavoured 1o make a point of my non-appearance at the meeting of Father Hay; What courage this man has to attack under a nom de plume! He attacked Mr Aitken—then makes reparation. What does he care, since his identity is unknown I Then he attacks no—because I was not ■ at Fatrer Hays’s meeting. How could I attend when I was not in Wellington ? I heard Father Hays three times in Christchurch. 1 called on him. Subsequently, I agreed to speak at one of his meetings, but it was postponed owing to the rev gentleman's indisposition. I have been on the no-lioense platform all over the colony, and have never attempted, as your correspondent suggests, to play the game he indicates. The brewery element has fought mo very hard twice. Twice 1 have routed them, and you may rest assured we do not misunderstand one another, even if your correspondent’s vision is blurred by the too frequent use of the liquid element that apparently is ever uppermost in his unoourageous mind. —I am, etc., F. M. B. FISHER. April 6th. “TEMPERANCE” AGAIN REPUTED.

(To the Editor “N.Z. Times.”)

Sir,—lt is only necessary for me to say in reply to “Temperance’s” column of abuse and suggestion of low motives that he is again misstating things when he says I accorded a public reception to a lady vocalist before Father Hays’s arrival here. Let Mr “Temperance” use his memory and not his imagination, and he wifi remember that what I did was to join with Messrs Aitken and Duthie in inviting a number of people interested in Scottish songs to meet Miss McLnchlan, when at our own expense, we gave our guests a cup of tea. This, as he will see, came to some extent under the second rule I laid down.

I presume it would have been more pleasing to “Temperance” if I had followed the case mentioned hy your correspondent as having been followed in Mr Barrett’s case.

I have never given a public reception to any vocalist. I have asked guests to meet vocalists on two occasions. and I signified my willingness to do the same thing on Father Hays’s arrival. I don’t think it necessary to follow ‘'Tempera n co” through his other statements. He is evidently unfortunate enough only to see motives

and dishonesty in other’s actions. Honi soil, etc.—l am, otc., T. W. HISLOP. April 6th. MAORIS AND THEIR. LANDS. (To the Editor "N.Z, Times.") Sir, —I do not see any answers to my letters in your paper. The Alaoris evidently are not going to build any Dreadnoughts, or cruisers, or torpedo-boat-destroyers, or torpedo-boats, and not even a submarine boat, for the rent they get out of the white men in Now Zealand. There are a lot of silly, sentimental people who will always stick up for the Alaoris. These people make a man’s blood boil. They strain at a gnat and swallow a camel. They think it terrible that 40.000 Alaoris i should have land taken off them, but I there are about 12,000,000 people at Home who do not get enough to oat. j That doesn’t trouble them at all! I “ You had no business in this country,” says the maudlin, sentimental man, “it belongs to the Alaoris; yon ought to stop in England.” The fact that England is over-populated is. no argument to him. It is against God’s laws and nature’s laws that there should be so many there and so few 7 here. Live and let live is a good motto. The Alaoris tome time ago said they had only each got about 509 acres of land left. That is about 495 acres too much. If the Alaoris had not been so petted and pampered by the Government they might have increased, as they would have been forced' to work. They have copied the. vices of the white man and not his virtues. I wish I had been born a Maori; then I might have had land for nothing, instead of perhaps having? to pay anything from £1 to £SO for it.—l am, etc., A LANDLESS WHITE MAN. Taihape, April 3rd. CARELESSNESS WITH FIREARMS. (To the Editor “N.Z. Times.”) Sir, —Your remarks to-day on this subject are cogent and pointed, and demand attention by all who have aught to d'- wixh the use of firearms. There is a maxim written long ago by, I think, a prominent medical man, speaking of an occurrence when a foolish joker piesented a supposed unloaded pistol at a friend—result, a dead friend. The maxim was this: “Never on any occasion present a firearm at any living creature unless year mean £o take it’s life.” Were this advice adhered to we should never again hoar of the -“didn’t know it was loaded” excuse —I am, etc., A BOYHOOD’S SUFFERER. April 6th. WRIT SARCASTIC. (To the Editor “N.Z. Times.”) Sir, —I regret the necessity ,of replying to a letter signed “Iconoclast” in your issue of yesterday, but as a polo player it not only makes my blood boil ts see our sports discussed in tho papers at all, but makes me feel that the'sport should be even more exclusive. The average citizen knows, of course, that there is no excuse for nim in thrusting Ins unwelcome pre ecnco on polo piayors. There has been a suggestion that the polo tournament and the wind up sports were ill-managed, and I may say on behalf of polo players that it was never intended that they should be well-manag-ed. If we did invito tile public into the paddock at Aliramar, we charged the few who came a stiff price, so that they wouldn’t come again. I have no doubt that “Iconoclast” will not again show himself at a polo meeting. He is not desired, anyhow. As for what we are going to do with the money gathered- from the bookmakers’ fees and the people who attended the racemeeting, what has that got to do with ‘Teener last” ? It is expensive running motor-cars to and from Miramar, ano petrol takes buying. I have heard it alleged that some of my friends tried to ride over tiro spectators at the meeting, and that some of the people were annoyed at. one of my friends telling us that “If they won’t keep off the "curse back your ponies into the beggars.” I would like to know why we shouldn’t ride over the people? W’k right have they to be interfering with polo? The accusation that we made no attempt to give the public any information is, of course, true. Why should we give the public any? Pole and its sports should never be attended by anyone but polo players, their lady friends and grooms, but any of the public who care to hold ponies for us while we are refreshing will he allowed to do so on payment of a fee.—l am, POLO PLAYER. April 6th.