OPPOSITION APOLOGIES.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 5502, 29 February 1896, Page 7

OPPOSITION APOLOGIES.

New Zealand Conservatives are generally proud of their superior teepd*. ing over that of mere vulgar democrats ; they are - loud >in their ; . ' advocacy of "milder manners, purer laws/ and' ib forth. It is one of the signs of a gentleman to be ready to apologise when provfed to be in the wrong; and certain. Opposition newspapers judged by this standard may fairly claim to bo run "by gentlemen.for gentlemen." In fact, some of our Conservative contemporaries are becoming so '.well practised in the art of apologising that they might vie with the gentleman'- of whom it is recorded that he was «._jo mildest-mannered man that ever cut a throat or scuttled a ship." They show a cheerful alacrity in apologising, but in too many cases it is only after they have made a villainous effort to cut the throat of some reputation, or scuttle the ship of State, through the medium of some shin, derous invention. It is pleasant to find the Southland Times making full amends for publishing the ridiculous canard abotit the Premier offering a portfolio to a Christohurch journalist. It expresses regret .ii its issue of Wednesday last for having made the statements, and adds'that either its informant "had been- gtossly misled" or must havo drawn largely on his iiaaginationfor what he declared to be facts." • The story was so palpably absurd on the face of it, that we Bhould have thought the merest political tyro would have been able to discount it; but the fact that it was seized upon with avidity and published as a ' leading article shows either that Opposition newspapers are eager to publish anything disparaging to the Government, altogether independent of its truth or probability; or that Conservative gentlemen of standing are in the habit of imposing upon journal-, istic good faith by vouching for -the correctness of statements that have'si^ply been evolved from the depth of their political mendaciousness. The Southland paper that was so shamefully «' sold " htyi had the grace to promptly withdraw and apologise for the untruthful stateanents, without being compelled to 'do so; but other Opposition journals have not alwie^ya shown so admirable a spirit. Everyone 1 remembers how two prominent Cohserva- ! tive journals^-one in Christehurch - and the other in Wellington— last year libelled the Colonial Treasurer and certain Government officials ; and even when it was evident that there was no foundation for their aspersions, left them uncontradicted for a; lengthy period, and only withdrew them., with abject apologies when threatened with actions at law. *.'■."* -'■■-'•• Another Opposition journal, the Wan-> ganui Chronicle, has: lately -had- 'asimilar experience:, It had published a letter from its Wellington corre. spondent describing the .... State. 'farm at Levin in a. jocular vein, but clearly, With a view to the disparagen^ent of the* whole • thing. This effort of elephantine humourcontained some reference to an auctioneering firm who were said* to hay©' taken, advantage of the innocence, of the manager of the farm to palm off . upon him certain animals he did not. want. . This brou£ht-a' lawyer's letter from a firm of auctioneers who thought they 'were indicated, aiid "the' Chronicle then backed down by declaring that it always sympathised with the ;B&te farm, but tad allowed latitude to its cbr-ce^-pondent. It went on to say.^at. it could only suppose that the correspondent "was hoaxed, or that he was indulging in a somewhat far-fetched and unwarrantedl joke." Similarly with regard to Mr Mackay, of the State farm; the Ch-okicU ia.noyr "assured that the paragraph which was published did him great injustice." /it expresses regret for the publication, and hopes " soon to be in a position to publish a description of the farm and its management from the pen. of an . impartial observer." It may occur to these apologetic Oppositionists that it would- be better in future to make sure of the truth of - statements, or of the impartiality and ; probity of their informants, before. they publish unfounded slanders on Civil servants, statesmen and State institutions. It must tend to destroy their influence to be continually obliged to admit that their revelations of corruption and wrongdoing haye no other foundation than. the * reckless jocularity, vivid imagination or unblushing. mendacity of their correspon-, dents and informants. From a public point of view,, it is gratifying to know that the critics of the Government, those?advocates of pure administration, so; far frpni ) sustaining any of 7 their. accusations) hay©., in many, cases- -withdrawn - them, not " Only* > with apologies, but' with ■ loss of mbhey^ of ■' ' influence, and of self-respept. 'But it is" deplorable to think that party politics have reached such a pitch in New Zealand that allegations of a false and, libellous kind should be freely published with a view to party advantage, and in utter carelessness of the effect upon private, reputations and the credit of the State.