Correspondence.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 4163, 24 August 1881, Page 3

Correspondence.

THE MUNIOIPAL ELECTIONS.

TO THE BDITOB OV CHS STAB.

* ib,— Will you kindly allow me a smaH space in your always interesting and exceedingly useful journal to reply to jour manypamgraphed correspondent " Citiz.n"*in yonr last, night's issue. First: With regard to the "pi eat deal of capital mado ouS of the improper means retorted to, lo secure names to the requisitions to Messrs Manning and Jenkins," it has never been charged against either of i hose gentlemen that they " would ever lend themselves to anything so paltry." "Citizen"' might have spared himself defence udod this point. Becond : The names of Messrs JVnkins' and Manning's committees before the publio— no doubt all honourable men— constitute no evidence that misrepresentations ?*ere not used in the first instance. Undoubtedly, respeotablo men liko Messrs Jenkins and Manning being candidates, their devoted admirers, personit frwid., and hangers on crowd round them a» a matter of course to render them support; but requisitions to bring a man forward aro usually signed before he is a candidate, and hi_ committee formed afterwards are neither responsible nor answerable for how thoy havo been manipulated. Who are the Darties who* gofc up these requisitions? The" gentlemen comprising the committee, or other wirepullers behind ? One thing is, however, certain, whoever may be responsible, misrepresentations wrre deliberately m_.e im many cns-B ; and in others, when it was clear thafc the gentleman asked to sign was labouring under a misapprehension in reference to the ward, no attempt was mado to undeceive him. I have myself seen letters addressed by prominent and respectable citizens to Councillor Hulbert on tho subject. I have heard the statements of others to the .ame effect — ifc would be invidious and an unwarrantable liberty to mention names, or I would givo them, and " Citizen" knows this and relies for security in the fact— in short, tho thing is an open and notorious scandal in the city,. When "Citizen" venfc__.es to oharacteriso wbat is so well supported in Chri-tchurch a» absurd and untrue, it says i. great deal more for his partizansbip than his discretion.

Third : " Citizen "is good enough to admit that Councillor Hulbert in the past has served the ratepayers " fairly well," bui , he enquires, is that any reason why he should presume to occupy fche position for ever ? I should say in reply that the office of Councillor iB one of trußt and confidence, and liko every ofioe of that nature is to be held during good behaviour. I do not Buppii.-e from tho style and tone of "Citizen's" ).'_ter that he has ever been an employer of L bour ; but, I would ask him to suppose fhafc ho employed a man who served him "fairly v ell," would he be acting in hie own intereste, and according to common: sense to send that experienced and tried man about his business, and take infco his servioe one whose character for efficiency was not sa good ? But I claim much more than " fairly well" for Councillor Hulberfc. I hava watched his munioipal career closely, and I find it marked by activity, energy, judgment, great courage and independence, and a sound manly tone throughout ; is such a servant to be rewarded for his disinterested efforts to serve the ratepayers by being kioked out for one who, whilst chairman of a neighbouring local body negligently allowed the olerk to make dnoks and drakes of the ratepayers* money, or for another who distinguished himself in a remarkable manner when formerly in the Oouncil by allowing the Tramway Company to do just whatever they liked, and obtain all sorts of very valuable concession! which have been the means of creating any amount of tmnble and dissatisfaction since P Sir, I have a - .eh higher opinion of the ratepayers of Oh ■ -tchurch than to believe suoh a thing for a rr. ment.

Fourth: _*•. for "Citizen's" suggestion that Council" >r Hulbert should retire in favour of his opponents — he doesn't say say which— it is simply a piece of impudence* But, Bir, the position put by yourself in tho Star has never been answered, nor has any attempt been made to do bo f Why thie rush to the Bouth-east Ward ? If Mr Manning, and his friends — who have so honestly broughc him forward — have no other motive* than to see him a member of the City Council, why not take him to either the North-west or North-eaßt Ward, whero seats are open to him without a contest f How doe. it happen that he and they prefer to engage in a hard Ught to turn out a man against whose municipal career they daro not breathe a whisper, when seats next door are waiting for them ? Do they foolishly suppose the citizens are so blind that they cannot read the handwriting of this manoeuvre P The object Bought is not to get a seat for Mr Manning, but to turn ont Mr Hulbert ! Why P Whom hath Councillor Hulbert '(Tended that this vengeance should be mci d out to him . There is but one answer, _. id you, Sir, with your Ksoal accumen have found it— the hidden powers of the Tram ( ompany! I have already referred to the concession* obtained by the Tramway Company when Mr Jenkins was a counoillor. Do they hop* for more f His requisition is easily accounted for, but the same string pulled both. Sir, the Tramway Company are going about, in secret, but they leave footprints behind them which show clearly enough their oourse. If the ratepayers aot wisely the^r will reject all their emissaries and chooso independent men— like Councillor Hulbert.— l an, 4c,

BATEPAYER.

CITY ELEOTION, SOUTH-EABT WABJK

TO THI BDITOB OT TBI STAB.

Sib, — Beferring to the letter in your yesterday's issue, signed " A Heathcote Ratepayer,'*" it cortainly strikes the reader as being a remarkable exhibition of consummately bad. taste, that such a letter could be written ia the face of the avowed determination of the candidates and their friends to oonduot thia. contest in the most friendly spirit on both, sides. The construction of the letter shows that the ill-minded writer is but an outsider, having no locus standi in this election. In, over-loading his statements, he carefully omits to mention that the real onus of the case he refers to weighs on the shoulders of his own particular friends. This specimen of ill-nature, I am sure, will not be endorsed by Mr Hulbert and the gentlemen who supporthim, it being so well calculated to damage the cause it would fain appear to advocate. — • I am, kc,

A BATEPAYEB, SOUTH-EAST WABD. Christehuroh, August 24.