PREACHING v PRACTICE.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1544, 6 July 1885, Page 2

PREACHING v PRACTICE.

To the Editor.

Bir, —On Saturday evening at the Town Hall, Mr Iveas, when fairlj cornered by Mr Purnell about the challenge question, took occasion in his wrath to vilify the whole of the profession to which Mr Purnell belonged. Without being offensive or wishing to hurt Mr Iveas’s feelings, 1 would like to ask, how many times he has started to study for a lawyer and had to cave in. He also in his usual ‘ high faintin’’ style (put on to catch the ignorant) entered upon the gross iniquities of the law of distraint for rent, and promised great things if he were re-, turned to Parliament in having that obnoxious law repealed. Very pretty posing indeed Mr Ivess ! But will you kindly toll the electors of Wakanui how many weeks ago it is since you put in a distraint for rent, and that without legal right to do so ? At Mr Ivess’s first meeting in the Town Hall he stated that far mers were forced to pay 7,8, 9 and 10 per cent when borrowing upon freehold security and often 5 per cent hai to be added tc it for the commission agent as a procuration fee. As the representative of one of the largest commission and money broking businesses in the district I can safely affirm that no farmers dealing with me have any such extortionate charges to pay, nor do I know of any one at present in the business knave enough to try it on. But I presume Mr Ivess’s purpose was to persuade the farmers that business men were their natural enemies, and if only he had the power he would soon stamp out such grinding extortion. I should like the electors to know, however. that during Mr Ivess’a short career as commission agent in this district his charges in several cases, to my own knowledge, were considerably higher than any one eWs This, gentlemen, is the man who when he wants your voce has the unblushing audacity to stand up like the Pharisee of old and thank God that he is not like other men, extortioners, unjcst ! At Mr Ivess’s first meeting his opening sentence expressed a strong hope that personalities and all bitterness would be avoided during the contest. His very next sentence, however, was devoted to denouncing as a clique, and a clique actuated only by personal antipathy to himself, a number a? gentlemen who were supporting Mr Wright, This line of conduct Mr ivess has consistently followed up at every subsequent meeting, and not satisfied with availing himself of every opportune y of making personal attacks on Mr Wright he has bestowed his favors equally upon Mr Wright’s sappoiters, his lead being followed up by his paid ink-slingers. Mr Ivess’s preaching has proved so ver> different to his practice that I would urge upon the electors of Wakanui to consider whether his loud denunciations of the “ f»ul blots on our Statute books" and his promise to remove the “ monstrous injustices ” from which we suffer are likely to he remembered by him whoa the polling day is over. Did he, when he had the chance, lift his finger or raise his voice against either of those oppressive laws, Imprisonment for Debt or Distraint for Rent. With such knowledge as this before them, together with his shuffling in connection with the honorarium question, also the ‘ misrepresentation” challenge, are the electors to believe that Mr Ivess’s pro r'essions are made for the purpose of being carried out or only to catch the votes of the unwary?—Yours, etc, David Thomas.