WAKANUI ELECTION.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume III, Issue 659, 10 June 1882, Page 2

WAKANUI ELECTION.

Nomination of Candidates.

The nomination of candidates for the much contested Wakanui seat took plade to-day, for the second time, at the County Saleyards offices. The weather was very wet and miserable, but there were still a good many present. The proceedings commenced by Mr Geo. Jameson, Returning Officer, reading the advertisement calling the meeting, Mr Jameson then intimated that ho was prepared to receive nominations. An ominous silence ensued. Five minutes or so having elapsed some one in the crowd suggested a song. This created a laugh, but nothing was done for some minutes, when Mr A. E Ingram got up and proposed Mr Sounders as a fit and proper person to represent the constituency of Wakanui. Mr St. Hill suggested that the question of who should be first proposed should be decided by lot. Another pause. Mr Jas. Brown then stepped forward to propose Mr Ivess. Their party had acted throughout that contest as well as the last one in a manly, straightforward manner. He certainly thought that, considering Mr Saunders’ Parliamentaryexporience, it would have looked better if that gentleman had been proposed first. However, his supporters apparently did not think so, They had the misfortune at that time to be unrepresented in Parliament. Through an unfortunate miscarriage Mr Ivess was not sitting in the House of Representatives at that moment as their representative, and it was due to that gentleman’s pluck that they had another chance to return him. He (Mr Brown) know for a fact that many men who would have voted for Mr Wason would not now vote for Mr Saunders.

The Guardian had done its best to tarnish the name of Mr Iveas, and had referred in disparaging terms to the “Pats, and Micks, and Dans” whose names had been removed from the roll. Mr Saunders had said ho was an old bullockdriver, but that would not help them much. They had heard of what took place in the Library, when Mr Saunders imagined that with Mr Swanson he was guiding the destinies of the country while they sat chitting by the fire. Looking at the two men, he would simply ask them to vote for Mr Ivess, and was certain that they would have reason, if they returned him, to feel proud of him. The nomination was seconded by Mr Samuel Gibson.

Mr Joseph Megson had great pleasure in proposing Mr Alfred Saunders, as a candidate for Wakanui. Mr Saunders was no untried man, but was an old an experienced politician, able and willing to fight for their interests, and one moreover who would set his face against the wasteful expenditure of public money, and economise in every possible way. And they had need of such men at the present time when a judicious economy was so essential to the welfare of the colony. The Mail, that great liar of Ashburton.—

[Loud uproar and cries of “ No, no !” groans and hoots from the back of the room..] Mr St. Hill (excitedly) : I call upon Mr Megson to apologise. Let him speak in proper language. Mr Megson : I can prove my words, and I will before the meeting is over. It was not my intention to offend any man. I may not be known here, but elsewhere I am known and appreciated. I say that if we take Mr Saunders as a political economist we shall not find his equal in the House of Representatives. Now, I am a farmer myself, and I put it to you thus: Suppose you wanted a ploughman, and resolved to advertise for one,°and two ploughmen presented themselves to you. One was an old and experienced ploughman, who has been at work all his life and knows the “ ran of the ropes,” and the other is a young and inexperienced “ new chum,” who knows nothing of his work, and can hardly distinguish between the handle of the plough and the coulter—l put it to you as practical men—which candidate would you select 1 Personally I have not one word to say against Mr Ivess, but this I do say —he has a lot to learn before he can render you any service in the House, for ho is totally unacquainted with Parliamentary procedure, and the customs and usages of the House. (Applause.) Mr John Irwin had great pleasure in •seconding the nomination, Mr P. Maguire at this stage got up and said that he had had an idea of coming forward himself as a candidate for Wakanui, and would do so if he could get anybody to nominate him. Mr John Laurie said he would propose Mr Maguire. [Mr Laurie here held a whispered consultation with Mr Maguire, then, walking up to the Returning Officer, said: “The gentleman says he won’t stand now. ”] (Uproarious laughter, which shook the building ) Mr Joseph Ivess, who was received with applause, said he did not propose to address them at any great length then, as it would be recapitulating what he had already said all over the electorate. If the views he had enunciated were in accord with their own he trusted he would meet with their support on Friday next. He sincerely desired to become their representative, and if he had the honor to be returned (of which he had little doubt) he would go to Wellington untrammelled by any feelings of class or clique ; he would go not to represent one portion of the electors but the whole constituency

of Wakanui. He would not indulge in vituperation—he had carefully abstained from doing so all through. (Cries of “ No, no,” “ Yes, yes,” and uproar.) It was a poor cause that was obliged to resort to abuse to support itself. Mr Iveas sat down amidst loud applause. Mr Saunders, who was received with applause, said ha had heard of a breach of the Corrupt Practices Prevention Act which had been committed during that contest, which was rather a novel one, and which by rights should have received attention before that. Some gmtle.men had been paid to do clapping and groaning. The service was a valuable one, no doubt, but he trusted that it was not too highly remunerated. (Laughter and applause.) He had been referred to as a “ bullock driver,” but, as a matter of fact, he had never been one. He had been a horse driver at one time between Sydney and Melbourne, and had had, on onooccasion, witnessed a somewhat remarkable fight between two strong men. The fight was conducted in rather a novel manner. One of the combatants got into a home and threw stones out of the window at his antagonist, but the stones not only struck the person they were aimed at, but also other people whom they were not intended to strike. At last the stonethrower was dragged out of his hiding place and asked to fight it out fairly. He said he wouldn’t be such a blackguard as to use his fists (laughter), and he couldn’t bo made to see that stone-throwing from behind the walls of the house was far more despicable than a straightforward fight face to face with his foe. However, at last the men were placed, and at the first blow the man who was ashamed to use his fists fell down and roared out, “ Why, you wouldn’t strike a man when he is down, would you ?” (Loud laughter.) Well, for the last four months he has been pelted with stones by his

political opponent —and very dirty stones they were—by a young man calling himself a gentlemm, and who had expressed his abhorrence of “ dirty work.” Mr Megson had used words which perhaps it was hardly advisable that he should have used—or that anyone should use for the matter of that. He had called the Mail “the groat liar of Ashburton,” and had been groaned at by that meeting in consequence, and yet were not his words borne out by facts 1 Why, in the last issue of the Mail a report appeared of his recent Town Hall speech which was moat untruthful and misleading. The Mail had substituted the word revenue of the colony” for “experts of the colony,” which gave the statement a totally different meaning, and, in fact, destroyed its sense altogether. Then, again, the 'Mail had reported the words, “Mr Ivess jumps twenty years ” as “Mr Ivess jumps ten years again destroying the effect of the remark. But besides those misstatements, Mr Ivess’a paper had charged him with using impro per language towards the Catholic body.

and the indulgence of “uncalled for invectives ” against the Catholics, whereas he had spoken of the Catholics in the most careful and respectful maimer, and pointed out, in the plainest possible terms, that he had striven to do his very be t to serve thou,. Was that statement of the Mail a lie or not 1 Was it a lie or not to say that ho had said “ ten ” when he had said “ twenty ” ? Was it a lie to say that he had spoken disrespectfully of a sect he had never spoken disrespectfully of yet, and never would? (Loud applause.) If ho thought Mr Ivess could servo them bettor than he could, he would most willingly retire in his favor. He was there to find out wherein the difference between his views and those of Mr Ivess lay, and if he couldn’t come forward and point out those {points of difference then he would he ashamed to do it at another time, would be ashamed to take refuge behind his paper, and throw stones from that hiding place. (Applause). Mr Ivess had been called the “Liberal ” candidate. Now, what did “Liberal” mean? It

meant one who advccated the equality of all classes —one who sought to raise all classes in every possible way, without hurting the interest of any class. He should he a careful watcher to see that the moneys of the colony were not wastefully squandered. Now, what did Mr Ivess say with regard to the railway charges 1 He told them that these charges were too high, and so did he. _ He (Mr Ivess) told them that the freight charges were also too high, but he said that the men who were employed to look after these things got too little. He had, in fact no idea of how to reform the matter, or what steps ought to be taken to that end. He talked about being more “liberal” when the colony was expending annually LOGO,OOO. If they would elect him he would look after their property as if it was his own. He would pay such wages to railway servants as would secure efficient men, and if he paid more he would simply be robbing the tax-payers of New Zealand. (Applause ) Another thing he ought to have said about “Liberalism” was this: in England ho used to characterise as very illiberal a man who swamped .a district with men whoso names ho caused to be put on the electoral roll, who had no right or title to appear on that roll, aid who possessed neither a legal nor a moral right to record their votes. They used in England to regard as very illiberal a man who sought to foster a few native industries at a ruinous cost to the community. The colony must direct its attention to pursuits that paid. Let them look at Engj land and see how she bad progressed under a free-trade policy, which had sent her ahead of America. _

(Mr St. Hill: The civil war, sir* nothing else.) Mr Saunders remarked, in reference to Mr St. Hill’s interruptions, that he would prefer, for his part, to make a speech all at once, and not in little bits. Resuming his speech, Mr Saunders said he had been accused of many crimes by hia political opponents, and had. been twitted with having been an inmate of Nelson gaol. Well, he had been, and ho had enjoyed himself very much indeed. If that episode in his life had enhanced him as much in the eyes of the Wakanui electors as it had in the eyes of the Nelson electors he would not have much dpubfc as to the result of the coming contest. Mr Morrow ; What about the Cheviot election 1

Mr Saunders: If I lose the present election it will be for the same reason as I lost that at Cheviot —the block vote. Mr Brown had made a very capital speech. He was a clever man, and had at .one of his (Mr Saunders’) meetings kept the “Tipperary boys ” in better order,; probably, than anyone else could have done. (Laughter.) But, in all Mr Brown’s speech, that gentleman had been very careful to refrain from one thing—and that was what Mr Ivess intended to do. He had told them what Mr Ivess had done ux the past, and of the great services he had rendered to the public ; but he had not said one word as to his intentions in ’ the future. Mr Ivess had passed a good many years of his life on the West Coast, and had been c mnected with ! one of the papers there, he believed. During that time Mr Ivess had not followed his (Mr Saunders’) example in going to gaoL He had preferred to take another course. Ho had passed five years in {Nelson Council, and yet he modestly asked therh to give him a trial in political life after five years’ experience of Parliamentary work l and then published columns of testimony to his value in the columns of his paper. Mr Ivess : I deny it, sir; I never wrote about myself in the Mail. Mr Saunders said be could quite believe that. Mr Ivess got some one else to write it for him. After some further remarks, which we are compelled to omit, in consequence of the length of the proceedings, Mr Saunders sat down, arid was challenged by the reporter of the Mail to substantiate his charge of misreporting. Mr Saunders had a “ happy knack ’’ of finding fault with the reports of the press. Mr Saunders contemptuously said that he had at first imagined that the Mail had not got a man who was capable of reporting. He had altered his opinion this morning. Some parts of his last speech had been reported very well indeed in the Mail, but other parts had been obviously re-written by Mr Ivess and his editor.

The show of hands resulted in 26 being held up for Mr Ivess, and 14 for Mr Saunders.

The proceedings terminated with a vote of thanks to the Returning Officer, proposed by Mr Saunders, and seconded by Mr Ivess.