THE COLONIST.

Colonist, Volume XV, Issue 1532, 31 May 1872, Page 2

THE COLONIST.

NELSON, FRIDAY, MAT 31, 1872

A PARTING SHOT,

Our Wellington correspondent last night telegraphed the following message:— Mr. Saunders writes a letbor to the livening Post, replying to a leader id the Independent of to-day. He denies having said or hinted ,nt anything, of a grave character which Mr, Yogel'did, or (hat ho said anything of the kind. Ha says, further, that the Nelson Colonist is a paper on which any well informed person would not be disposed to place „ much, reliance at any time, much less on the reports of the nomination. He says that Mr. Luckie's speech was greatly enlarged nnd impiwed upon, while the speeches of his opponents were out dovvn to a small compass, some sentences being out off in the middle; and he concludes thas : —"When addressing the Nelson electors, with reference to the great political capital thut was being made out of the. Fox Hill Railway, I said I did not coma to Nelson to degrade myself, by making any promises of local services which I knew I could not perform. The Colonist leaves out the latter part of the sentence, and then writes an article easily demonstrating the ahsurdity of half a sentence, which it choose* to attribute to me. This is one sample, and suffices to show your readers how much reliance can be placed upon all other absurdities which are attributed to me in the same quarter." Mr. Sauuderg w exhibiting too much temper, and too little consideration for facts. He certainly made very grave charges against Mr. Vogel. In bis first speech as reported by an accomplished shorthand writer, and others who took what are termed "check notes" of the speech, Mr. Saunders unquestionably did say this:— "In coming through America he-heard a great denl of the manner in which Mr. Voge] had travelled, occupying carriages which would hold, twenty-eight all to himself, and detaining Bteamers at the cost of thousands." These are the precise words, neither more nor less. Reference was made to this unjust charge, both in these columns, and in a letter by Mr. Yogel himself, explaining that the American railway companies placed the carriage at Mr. Voxel's service, and thab no cost was caused by detention of steamers. At the nomination,"Mr. Saunders (who had previously spoken very highly as to the accuracy of the report of his speech as it appeared in our columns), alluding to this said, he was perfectly aware that he could have brought a much graver charge against Mr. Vogel, and he most distinctly implied that Mr. Vogel's acceptance of this, free carriage, was a piece of corruption,—wa^is he phrased it, the " sprat" swallows' It Mr. Vogel to catch the mackerel, vt"pT the taxpayers of this country had to produce. Instead of apologising for making a false charge against an absent man of spending thousands in railway travelling and in detaining steamers, Mr.'Sauuders mado the offence worse, by attributing corruption. Mr. Luckie's speech at the nomination was neither enlarged nor improved. It was reported by a short-hand writer, and, for the sake of space, was absolutely shortened. Mr. Richmond's and Mr. Saunders'e speeches were admittedly more condensed than Mr, Luckitt's, and were, with some few additions, taken from the report of the Evening Mail, which was adopted in consequence of the bustle of' election day haviug caused the work in our compositors' room to Jail considerably in arrear. The Mail's report is not likely to be inimical to Mr. Sauuderp. To have reported the proceedings at length would have necessitated the filling of a dozen columns of our paper, and this was the less necessary, seeing that before our, issue the election was decided, and the speeches of the defeated candidates became therefore of less consequence, especially that of Mr. Saunders, which consisted chiefly of unjust attacks on the Colonist and Mr, Luclde, a condensation of which was perfectly sufficient, as they took the place of that policy which was looked for from Mr. Saunders, but which never came. Regarding ,the latter portion of the telegram as to a mis-quotation from his speech, Mr. Saunders simply misleads his readers. The report in the Colonist distinctly stated that he said to the electors that " no did not come to degrade himself by any offers of local services, which he might never , perform." This is a quotation from the report itself, aud is somewhat different from the way Mr. Saunders now chooses to put it. As for the parting abuse Mr. Saundera thinks proper to throw on the Colonist from Wellington, that we can pardon in a beaten man. Old associations and kindly relations in the past led us, in referring to him and his speeches, to adopt a tone more tender than his assaults on this journal and its Editor entitled him to, Hft

came to Nelson under a delusion, first, as to the feeling of the people ; secondly, as to his own individual power. He began, as of old, to strike out all round ; but he could not brook retaliation, even of the gentler sort. Mr. Saunders made two mistakes: one m coming to Nelson at all on electioneering purposes bent, against the advice of his best friends ; secondly,—having come,—in assuming an air of superiority, and making a general assault on his opponents, without any particular provocation, and under the gross delusion that these assaults would be submitted to without effective retaliation. There was another mistake committed, and that was in losing his temper when fairly and honestly beaten, and permitting that temper to lead him to write unfair and misrepresenting letters in another place, regarding circumstances which, if untrue, he had ample opportunity of correcting in Nelson. We had no wish to refer to thi* subject, but charges of this kind Mr. Saunders rushed blindly into, the moment he arrived iv Nelson, and he has suffered accordingly. We do not object to his abuse of the Colonist, for the value of his attacks is now pretty well know a.