The Stars. MONDAY, OCTOBER 26, 1868.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 142, 26 October 1868, Page 2

The Stars. MONDAY, OCTOBER 26, 1868.

It appears that the movement for opening up the direct road to Riccarton, through Hagley Park, is to meet with opposition. Where that opposition comes from, and by whom it is directed, are matters of conjecture, and this ia exactly what we find fault with. The promoters of the movement have made no attempt at concealment; they have acted openly and in the light of day from tho commencement, and we appeal to the public to say whether it is in accordance with the usual practice of Englishmen to fight under! cover, as the opponents of the scheme are doing. If their cause ia just, ir, as \ they profess, they have the public inj tereßt at heart, why should they conceal themselves? We have heard it said that they cannot, or will not, see beyond the Triangle and Cashel street, and that they are afraid to head an opposition openly, because they cannot do it honestly. But we refuse to believe this. We refuse to think that any citizen would allow his private interests to regulate his public conduct. And yet, we are bound to admit that this secret opposition goes far to confirm the suspicions which are already afloat. If there is to be a fight over this matter —though we fail to see why there should be — let it be conducted openly and fairly on both sides. We are sorry to notice that the promoters of the secret opposition are endeavouring to get up a cry of selfishness, and to brand those who are actively interesting themselves in the opening up of this road as being actuated by motives of pure selfinterest. Apart from the fact that cries of this sort are very discred itable to those who raise them, they immediately provoke the retort that the opposition springs from a yet worse form lof selfishness. If ifc is true that the promoters of the Bcheme are influenced

by a direct personal interest, ia the same not equally true of their opponents ? With this difference, the cases are exactly parallel — the former are striving to obtain something which is calculated to benefit a large portion of the city, the latter are endeavouring to hinder the movement because they fear that they will themselves lose ] something. That is tbo plain English of the matter, and while those who are iv favour of the road act in a straightforward manner, thereby showing that they believe in the justice of their cause and that they are not afraid of criticism, those who are opposed to them fight anonymously, which is iv itself stroug evidence that they fear the verdict of the public. The opponents of the proposed road profess to be anxious for what they call the rights of the people in their Park. What ! Is it come to this, that honest work and a desire for the public good must shelter itself behind an anonymous advertisement ? Are the people not to know the men to whom they are indebted ? Must patriotism so pure, public spirit so laudable, hide its head ? Are the affairs of this city always to be regulated, are its public works always to be guided, with a special regard for the interests of the Triangle and Cashel street ? Is that part of the city to be everything, and all the other parts nothing? Ts the north end of the city to be denied a road which both town and country ask for, because itis possible that this same road may divert a portion of the traffic from the Triangle and its neighbourhood ? We regret to be compelled to write in this strain, but it appears to us necessary, for the public interests, that we should be plain.