DUNEDIN CENTRAL.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 16292, 27 January 1915, Page 4

DUNEDIN CENTRAL.

The speech •which Mr Statham delivered in the Princess Theatre last night in support of his candidature for re-election for Dunedin Central was a straightforward, frank, and vigorous utterance that cannot have failed to impress favourably the electors who assembled to hear it. Necessarily Mr Statham had to deal somewhat largely with points personal to himself. The effort is being industriously made to represent Mr Munro as a very' hardly used man who is entitled to the sympathy of the constituency. The carefully-pre-pared resolutions that are submitted at his meetings all tender the sympathy of his audience to Mr Munro in the unfortunate circumstances in which he is placed. It has even been suggested that Mr Statham should have presented the seat to Mr Munro by refraining from persevering with his candidature for re-election. We admit that it is Mr Munro's misfortune that by a technicality he lost the seat to which he had apparently been elected by a majority of the electors. Mr Statham has now, however, placed the position before the electors in a light that will be new to most of them. Irrespective altogether of the official mistake that rendered invalid a considerable number of votes, of which the majority were recorded in Mr Munro's favour, there were, he says, circumstances connected with the election which he believes would have entitled him morally, equitably, and legally to have had the election upset or even to have taken the seat away from his opponent. That is the answer to the partisans who declare that if Mr Munro had lodged a petition against Mr Statham's return the result would certainly have been the upsetting of the election. But why was no election petition lodged ? Mr Munro has not offered any explanation on this point. Presumably he relied upon the senso of fairness and of honour of the opponent against whom some of his supporters have been busily and maliciously levelling the most frivolous charges. Whether this be so or not, Mr Statham certainly, by his action in resigning his seat, relieved Mr Munro from all the anxiety and expense that would have been associated with the prosecution of an election petition of which the outcome would have been doubtful. Mr Statham was himself made the target at the general election for attacks of the most uncharitable and reprehensible character which must have had the effect of depriving him of a certain number of votes that, as matters turned out, would have been of distinct value to him. He does not, however, make any appeal for sympathy on that account. He asks the electors to support him on his merits, and we are disposed to think that he will not ask in vain. He is again, however, being called upon to meet misrepresentation of the grossest description. There would seem to be no limit to the extent to which some of his political opponents will go in their distortion of facts in the hope of influencing votes against him. Those who are engaged in the campaign of " mud-slinging," as Mr Statham himself called it, really seem to entertain a very poor opinion of the intelligence of the electors and of the interest taken by tho electors in political issues. The fictions which they are most assiduously spreading are so gross and palpable that they should deceive only the most ignorant persons in the community. Upon one point, however, even intelligent people seem at the last election to have allowed themselves to be misled with respect to Mr Statham's views. We refer to the matter of his attitude towards the question of religious instruction in schools. Upon this point Mr Statham made last night a specific and

clear pronouncement which we commend to the attention of the electors who have been induced to believe that he. would "boycott the Bible in the schools" or actually that he is " opposed to the Bible." Mr Statham not only successfully disposed last night of the misrepresentations of his own actions that have, been freely and discreditably circulated but also gave an effective answer to the allegation, which is dishonestly made by many people who know better, that the legislation passed by the Government has been wholly or mainly in the interests of a particular class. The allegation is flagrantly untrue, and Mr Statham demonstrated its flimsiness and unworthiness by a recital of the labour and humanitarian legislation for which the Government is responsible and of tho benefits which members of tho public services have received since the Reform Government came into office.