The Timaru Herald. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 23, 1890.

Timaru Herald, Volume L, Issue 4825, 23 April 1890, Page 2

The Timaru Herald. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 23, 1890.

In some shape or, other tho naxe of Mr George' Fisher, ex-Minister of the present Cubiuct and mctuber for Wellington East, is constantly obtruding Itself on public notice, and not alwaya m the most pleasing manner. . The circumstances which led to bio enforced resignation are not yet buried m oblivion, aud be b;in never forgiven Ins former colleagues far the stand which they kml; ou tlr.it occoaiuii. SubEu([iicntly m the Hondo he' made things us (lis.iprce.iblo a3 bo possibly could for bis erstwhile friends, ;iud attracted eousidtrablo attention liy ho doing. Later Blill be kept himself before the public by writing ;>. letter (obviously inWuded for publication) m which be aur.ouuced the necessity for a new party and new lenders, the old ones to be banished into private life. The general impression civ.Mted liy that tffasion wsia tb;it Mr Fisher regarded himself as the crmiing man, aud we dare say that such an atubitioa is not absent from his tbougbl3. More recently he has written to the papers overhauling Sir Harry Atkinson's finance m very strange fashion, aud falling into some unaccountable bluuders. All this, how ever, serves to keep the name of Mr George Fisher en evidence, aud as the multitude doC3 not. care much for investigating the s.ccnracy of figures, a good many have attached weight to his criticism, and his purpose is thus served. But lie lias most recently been before the public m another ■way altogether, and certainly without any willingness on his part. In the curly part of last month ho laid an information m tho Wellington R'.uhknt Magistrates C-Hirt against a woman named Elk', i Jane Moss, charging her " with having on the <lth of February last used to the said George Fisher provoking ai.d insulting language, to wit — ' When are you going to pay me tho £5 '■ — for the purpose of annoyance and provocation, the complainant, George Fisher at that time not being m any way indebted to the defendant, Eliza Jaue Mosß." Tlie case was heard m due course, and Eliza J:ine Moas was bound over to keep the peace, with one surety m Iho sum of £10. :Whcn Mr George Fisher was m the witneps-box he swore that he did not owe tho defendant anything, but crosstxamiaatiou on the point was cot permitted. The defendant was sworn and proceeded to tell the story of the alleged loan, but was stopped, Mr Fisher saying that, the cao'e'was not one of debt, aud that the defendant could sue him civilly if she. chose. Ho also expreeoed a strong desire that she would do so m order that his liability might bo fairly tested. Such a case— asking for sureties of the peace against a woman — was a disagreeable for an ex-Minister and member of .Parliament to be concerned m, and a great many of Mr Fisher's friends and admirers 'thought that ho would have shown better judgment if he bad disregarded the annoyance to which he had been subjected. That of course) ia v. matter of taste aud opinion, and no one can question Mr Fisher's right to act as ho did, supposing -him to have been insulted by a public demand for money which he 'did not owe. Thero is a sequel to the story, and it Bccirm probable that there will be yet further developments. Eliza Jane Moss took Mr Fisher at his word, arid issued a summons m the civil'jurisdiction of the court for the recovery of the £5 which she alleged had been lent by her to him. . Tho case wan set down for- 'hearing last Thursday, bur, when called on, the parties, though they had been-present, did not nppear. But tho conned for Eliza Jane Mosn stood up and said that ho had observed that the parlieii had left tho court, and that he concluded that defendant, Mr George Fisher, had found it more discreet to Bottle outside. Thus the result was reported m tho Wellington papers, but it is only fair to remark that possibly the truo explanation was that Eliza ,/unc Moss, 'the plaintiff, deemed it prudent to abandon her claim nt the last moment. If ao there wan no necos sily for tho appoaranco of the defendant, though doubtless bis position would have been bettered had be answered to bio name, m which caso he could have taken n judgment, and finally disposed of tho claim. But n most extraordinary 'statement lias been made m an article published m the Wellington. Evening ■ F>rr,s on Friday bifit. The position of Mr Fishnr an a pnblio man — ■ an bx-Ministcr and n member of Parliament — makes it right that (bat . statement should bo taken notice of. Our contemporary nayn : — "4lr-i:.i not necessary for iih li> detail aJI tho cirrumHtances I iind iill tho negotiations under which I the siiid'.EKz'i .tauo Musb wati iuduocd

to leave the court, where she was patiently ■waiting for the case to be called on, tbongh we Lave the whole ciropmatantiul particulars. What we are assured on good authority did take place is tbat at the rcqnesfc of the said George Fisher the eaid Eliza Jane Moss did ultimately go with tbe said George Fisher to a curtain house, that ho obtained there tbo sum of £5, aud iv settlement of tho claim of Eliza Jane Mosa paid the said sum of £5 to tbe said Eliz* Jauo Moss, and then and there procured her signature to a paper writing to the effect that she would not communicate to. tho public.press what had taken place, and would not talk about the matter iv public. Tuogc statements, it seems to us, if they are true, point to oue oE two conclusions, cithei' tbat the said George Pislicr did owe tbe said sum of £T>, and shrunk from facing the hearing of tbe case iv open court, or tbnt he has been guilty of an indiscretion, the most astounding that. any uiau u£ bis apparently robust temperament ever committed.!' We by no means wish it to be understood tbat, because we have reprinted those Bentenee3 from the article m the Wellington Fvcning Press, we believe tbe story told therein. It is possible tbat our contemporary may have been grossly mis informed, nnd we sincerely trust that it is so. It would bo unfair to bold Mr Fisher guilty of -an indiscretion or of something worse, without giving him the fullest opportunity o£ : making an explanation. .But tbe point ■which we desire lo ii)3i3t on is that as such grave statements have made m the most public manner by a newspaper of repute, Mr Fisher, being a member of Parliament and a somewhat promiuent politician, is m duty bound not to let tbe matter rest where it is at present. He ought at once to take the public into bis confidence, and say whether tbe • Wellington Evening Press has slandered him or not. Some explanation, we presume, he mnst'bave^and the sooner it is forthcoming the better.