THE Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR O'CLOCK P.M. Resurrexi. TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 1875.

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2137, 9 November 1875, Page 2

THE Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR O'CLOCK P.M. Resurrexi. TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 1875.

The New Zealand Herald, having read the Otago papers and the accounts therein contained of the Macandrew demonstration, is very wrath, —properly-indignant is better—with the Press Agency because of the telegrams they received stating that the said demonstration was. a? failure. It would appear, however, that the New Zealand HeralcT- limits ; the;;o*aggj.p;£ip:erji to one, and, that one the Otago Daily Times ; having read tliis, and apparently only this, and finding in- this paper .statements which) to the. mind of the Herald,'.-.- do not; warrant the slur of failur.e being cast on the eatings and-;;drinkings and speeches in the South;-; ■ fhe Herald declares that the telegram dematids" prompt explanation from the. Agency if it would not entirely forfeit confidence." The explanation appears to be very easy to those whb have, -unlike the Herald, read more accounts than that of,.theTimes—it may be as prompt as the Press Agency chooses'to make it. It is simply this : the Herald takes up the Qtago Tjmes and finds in it statements which it: cannot reconcile with the word -" failure," so after a brief exordium, ""setting forth the sins and iniquitiesi of the Otago Daily Times in-,,:, endeavouring persistently to hold up-Sir George Grey to the minds of the "Otagp people, /' to •whom he is but little known, as childish, as a communist, as a disappointed man, and as one who had out-lived the greatness of mind and character which even his enemies were forced to grant him," it comes to the conclusion that if any journal could throw cold water on the Macandrew demonstration that journal would be the Otago Daily Times, and as the Otago Daily Times does not,: : according "to the Herald, ;. throw cold water: on it, therefore the. Press Agency must promptly explain what they telegraphed. Now. unlike the New Zealand Herald we have read other accounts of the affair than that in the Otago Times, and as they may be new to the Herald they may, .perhaps, furnish some portion of that explanation for which there is such prompt need at the hands of the Press Agency. Surely the Auckland experience of the Herald ought to have led a journal as sagacious as itself not to trust to one account only where two or three are written, . and not to put entire, credence in one journal— even though that -journal be marked by a spirit' of disparagement to Sir George Grey—while it has it in its power to read other .accouuts.which the Press Agency may more have trusted than that of the Otago Times. Just consider what this would lead to if always acted on! What would the Herald think of a telegram sent it by the Cross if it were to read an account of the same things in theWcolurnns "of the Auckland Star? It is simply a case of doctors disagreeingj and we may well say to the Herald what, according to Punch, Dr. Colenso said to Dr. Prince Lee, late Bishop of Manchester— : My dear Prince Lee, . You scold poor me, - - ■■ :. ' • ' But this is true, as you must see,. . •: The hare, says Moses, chews the cud, It don't, says Owen, now my Lud. One says one thing, one another, and if the Herald had only read the Otago Guardian while it was about it, it would doubtless have deemed it unnecessary to require any .explanation, prompt or otherwise. It is true that the Reception Committee had induced a band to greet the four Superintendents on their arrival, with the air, " Sec the Conquering Hero Comes," but that struck the Otagc Guar.dkn, as iValso strikes us, and ¥cry likely will strike the Herald too, as rather incongruous praise to offer to the representatives of a party just defeated by a majority of 52 to 17 ; and the rest of the description we read in the Guardian leads us to form the conclusion, either that the whole affair must be regarded as a failure, or else that the Herald and the people of Otago are satisfied with very little in the way of success. For instance, one shop ih'three being shut iv a very limited portion of. the town's area does not present to the mind the idea of a very prevailing and universal enthusiasm, neither does the announcement that "«an attempt was here made to raise a cheer, but it was of the faintest possible description, proving

ineontestably the poor decrepit condition pf Provincialism," tend to exalt one's yiew of the matter. In answer to the address presented to Mr Macandrew wo have the following paragraph, which also seems to confirm the wordx^fafture^'*"l*?---pffensive to Herald. We rojad^: s" His-*, Jlonor replied in a few words/but what' those words were we are.noKprepared to ' Say, for there was tin attempt at cheering-1 and groaning that made his voice inaudible. However, ib is satisfactory to know that- ho -said something.- -. The, par-ty ,th<2.n hurried off to the carriages which were waiting." All the surroundings of this .."successful",demonstration seem to have been on the same footing, according to tho Guardian. Two carriages, two horsemen, seven committee-men who looked particularly tincomfortable on foot, and a very decided attempt at a cheer, which, like the one at the station, suffered a premature death, hardly justify Mr Macandrew in calling the' affair an.enthusiastic reception, however gratifying to the reception committee it may have been to have heard it. We need not go on to multiply instances in which we [ might show that the word "failure" is iby no means misapplied.. The'whole acI count written in the Guardian tends to make light of the .affajr, and in a subleader, . devoted to the same subject, it is characterised as a " draggle-tail perj forinance," whose only success was the few guns which the committee managed to borrow for the occasion. If the Herald reads it we think it will be quite satisfied with the telegrams they and we received, unless ..after having declared that the Times ought to be believed because it wishes to be unfavourable, but is favourable, it is inconsistent, enough^to say that the Guardian mustbe disbelieved because, with the same wishes, it gives a different account. - . "" ' ip- "<

His Excellency ' the '"■ Governor has disallowed " The Otago Gold Bonus Ordinance, .1875." Tinder this ordinance -of the Provincial Council, of Otago it was proposed to grant a- bonus; of sixpence per ounce on alli gold raised in the Province of Otago from the Provincial revenue; A bill was passed at a former session of the Otago Provincial Council to give a ! retfate of- sixpence per ounce on the gold produced in the Province, but that was disallowed, and it was intended that The Bonus Ordinance should answer the same purpose. While the gold duty, which is levied by act of the Assembly should .remain the same, as an encouragement jto the mining industry and a partial relief of the special burden laid upon it, the Province determined to pay to producers a bonus of sixpence per ounce on gold exported, froni the Province. The Government, however,, appear to have decided that there shall be no invidious distinction made in the treatment of gold miners, simply because one province may be in a position to dispense with a portion of the revenue available from the export of gold. No doubt the proper remedy would be to abolish the export duty altogether. ;