COUNTRY EDITION. The Daily Telegraph. TUESDAY, JULY 26, 1881.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3144, 26 July 1881, Page 2

COUNTRY EDITION. The Daily Telegraph. TUESDAY, JULY 26, 1881.

The approaching general elections irresistibly call to mind the last contest for the representation of Napier. In the borough Mr John Buchanan polled 365 votes, and Mr Maney 350. Mr Sutton secured 338 votes, and Capfain Kussell brought up the rear with 332. In the country the respective positions of the candidates were greatly altered. Mr Sutton polled 252 votes, Captain Russell 246, Mr Maney 152, and Mr Buchanan only 102. Thus the country votes exactly reversed the decision of the town electors, and put Mr Sutton and Captain Russell into the House of Representatives. Apart from the fact that Messrs Buchanan and iVlauey were known to be advocates of Sir George Grey's announced policy, which was deemed at the time to be detrimental to the best interests of the country, it may not be without its use to remember one other of the reasons that led to the success of Mr Sutton and Captain Russell. Since Hawke'e Say has been represented ia the General Assembly its representatives have been noted for working in harmony. In the choice of candidates it has been not alone the one object of the electors to select those who would sit and vofe together in the House, but to seod the best men to Parliament that the district contained. Hawke's Bay has certainly never had any occasion to be ashamed of its representatives. In the ear'y days we had Mr FitzGerald, our first Superintendent; Mr Donald Gollan, now in England, who wae succeeded by Mr Orrotiud, Mr Colenso, who is still with us, -who ws3 defeated in 1866 by Sir Donald (then Mr) M'Lean. For several years Sir Donald and Mr Orraond represented the two electoral districts of Hawke's Bay, till Napier, obtaining an extra member, Captain Russell was elected after a sharp struggle. The death of Sir Donald McLean left a vacancy, which was filled by Mr Sutton, who easily defeated Mr Buchanan. Mr Sutton owed his success in a great measure to the desire on the part of the electors to maintain the unity ot feeling that had always subsisted between their representatives. They felt that by . returning Mr Buchanan a split in the camp would have resulted, and that Hawke's Bay might just as well have but two members as to send the third to vote against the others. And this same feeling, we are persuaded, entered very largely into the result of the last general election. Rightly or wrongly, a large majority of the electors of both the Napier and Clive districts have ever regarded Mr Ormond as the very best man that could be chosen to represent Hawke's Bay; and it was always with a view to strengthen bis hands in the House that the other members were selected. With the political enmity that was known to exist up to the time of the last elections between Mr Buchanan and Mr Ormond, the electors felt that they would be stultifying themselves to send those two together to Parliament. Hence Mr Buchanan's defeat in 1875, and again in 1870. It was not because he was in any way unworthy to represent this district; on the contrary, his abilities were acknowledged by bis greatest opponents; an 4 bis knowledge of the (Jjetriot an<J of

its requirements could not be gainsaid. It was sufficient for the country electors to tbink that be would not work with Mr Ormond for them to reject him. In the last two years, however, a very great change has come about in public opinion, but it is fair to etate that Mr Buchanan has not changed the one great point in his political views. Mr Buchanan is as staunch to provincialism as he was at any previous time, but it is Mr Ormond who has come round to his opinion. And now we find the two representatives we sent to Parliament to work with Mr Ormond are directly opposed to him. How will this affect the next elections ? For we look upon Mr Ortnond's return to the House as a certainty. It is hardly possible for us to suppose that the Clive electors would choose anyone in preference to a member, who has not only distinguished himself as a statesman, but who bas been keenly alive to the interests of his constituency. To replace such a one as Mr Ormond by another who has never exhibited administrative ability in local affairs, and never had the slightest parliamentary experience, would be a political suicide that we imagine the good sense of 'be Olive electors has never seriously contemplated for one moment. Regarding then Mr Ormond's re-election as a certainty, the object of the electors should be to return with him colleagues who would act with him. And the question that arises is this : As Mr Sutton and Captain Russell have shown that they are not going to woik with him, and moreover intend to fight each other for the representation of the Napier country district, who would be the best to select, that we may have once more three members who would act together for the good of the Hawke'e Bay leectorates ?