POLITICAL ART OF SELF-DEFENCE.

Auckland Examiner, Volume 1, Issue 27, 18 June 1857, Page 2

POLITICAL ART OF SELF-DEFENCE.

The original Mrs. Slipslop, when vexed with Lady Booby, insinuates that her ladyship’s ears are the "Jdelicatest parts about her Our Mrs. Slipslop, in wrathful mood with Cross Carleton, would have us believe him not a whit more virtuous than her curious prototype thought Lady Booby. So angry is our own dear SlipslopAhat her heart seems to have walked clean off with her head. Electoral purification has made unfortunate Hugh more than ever hateful in her eyes. She allows he "has a tongue will wheedle with the devil;” but insinuates that not even the Father of Lies ever wheedled to worse purpose. Assisted by her cooks, in quality of " respected correspondents, she denounces the new move as entirely factious and, as if driven to despair by the machinations of her arch foe announces her intention to turn factious in self-defence. Poor thing 1 her feelings out-j-aged, and wits debased by hated Hugh with his mercenary gang of roll purgers, she resolves to foil them at their own doubtful game ; to let them see she can be factious if she likes; ■and having altogether in vain for a long series ef years tried virtue upon their obdurate hearts, will now, purely in self-defence, be more factious than the best of them. Her leader of Saturday may be accepted as one of the best possible treatises on the political art of selfdefence* After reading that treatise, no one can'doubt that if Mrs. Slipslop has m the Electoral Roll matter been outmoved and out-manoeuvred by her wheedling antagonist, he must look to his laurels, or make up his mind to see them grace the “ unsmirched brow” of his virtuous hut indignant enemy. That injured person having resolved to leave her virtue where hardpushed soldiers do their baggage there can be -no reasonable doubt that her new factious move against new factious move will be rapid and decisive. Virtue avaunt! Mrs. Slipslops herself again—so she assures us—nor is such assurance all she vouchsafes; for how skilful she is in the political art of self- lefence appears from Saturaday’s illustration thereof. Having, then, laid aside all the restraints imposed upon her by a stern, almost Oato-like, sense of virtue, she hit out out in a style that Carleton with all his science will scarcely relish.

Point-blank accusing him through a piece of nicely-cooked correspondence of turning big beggarman, ostensibly for the purpose ot purging the Electoial Roll but really with the design of paying the expenses of his own re-ection was, as Garrick says —A hit, a hit, a very palpable hit! —and not only was the hit very palpable but confounded hard. Ic is, nevertheless, logically demonstrable that so pious a person as Mrs. Slipslop indubitably is, should not overcome evil with evil, nor do evil, even though good may come of it —a kind of policy only befitting those less virtuous than herself. Do we not know that she gives utterance to the sentiments of our Superintendent ? And need Auckland citizens be told that what appears in his own newspaper be is morally responsible for ? Not, then, upon Mrs. Slipslop, or her staff of literary cooks should the punlic charge whatever appears in the “ New Zealander.”

Newspaper responsibility must lodge somewhere ; and it seems to us that the Superintendent who while at least part owner of a newspaper allow to be enunciated therein principles and plans should have all the praise, or, it may be all the censure, appertaining to their publication. Many people think that Superintendents should have nothing to do with newspapers. Such is our own opinion. Many people think that Superintendents should not tender for Government jobs, whether printing jobs or any other. Here, again, we agree with many people. But Superintendent Williamson is not by any means nasty-nice. All for the good of the Province he prints for it, and, all for 'the good of the Province, he profits largely by one of its newspapers. That newspaper puts forth his feelers, enunciates his policy, extols his friends, vituperates his enemies, beats out to any extent his wonderful virtues, and drivels out to any extent yard-long extenuations of his manifold sins. Clear it is then that Mrs. Slipslop is but Superintendent Williamson’s "head cook and bottle washer;” that the hell-broth twice-a-week served up by herself or correspondents he must accept the responsibility of; and that policy of turning factious in self-defence, is as much bona-fide property of himself and partner Wilson, as the types, paper, and presses, in their joint stock printing office. Now, these joint stock journalists, joint stock printers, joint stock religionists, and. joint stock all-but-cverything profess to he purists; profess to be animated by a soul of hohor; profess to regulate their conduct by a spirit of piety ; profess, in short, to be actors out of all the virtues under heaven. Yet their art of political self-defence

resolves itself into factious opposition to faction, or, to state differently the same truth, into following the bad examples of their wicked progress opponents, who are snubbed for proposing to purge- the Electoral Roll on the delicate ground that they were not in earnest; that itwasmerely unjust factiousness in earnest; that, in fact, the whole thing was a " party dodge,” which only another “ party dodge ” could neutralize the evil influence of. Poor Progress purists, instead of being applauded for returning to the paths of virtue, or (as they might have been) for assuming virtue even though they had it not, met sftre discouragemect from Mrs. Slipslop, who, aided

heartily by her cooks, threw ship in their faces sundry quantities of her scalding hot " hellbroth." An ignoble policy cannot be more than cunning. To that policy the Provincial Government are now committed. Should Superintendent Williamson carry it out, nowise man will dispute his claim to the posssesion of that faculty which Poet Churchhill describes as one

Which Nature, kind indulgent parent, gave To qualify the blockhead .for a knave. And give personal testimony in favor of the sage who said, There isjas much difference between the cunning man and the wise, as between him who wins a‘game by trickery and the player who wins it by honest skill.