The Evening Star MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 1872.

Evening Star, Issue 3000, 30 September 1872, Page 2

The Evening Star MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 1872.

What does it mean 1 ? was a question asked us by a fiiend, on his hearing ot the unseemly calling of a meeting in Leith Ward by some person unknown. What purpose was to be answered by it? We really cannot toll. Jt was a very foolish proceeding, very objectless, and very discreditable to those who convened the meeting, whoever they were. Mad it been the Ist ol April, it might have passed as a joke ; but •there was not even the shadow of wit in the alfair. So ashamed do the conveners appear to have been ol their own proceedings, that they had not the courage to step forward and own their share in them. Unfortunately the evil of such transactions does not end with the inconvenience and sense of the ridiculous which every one who attends is subjected to by such senseless practical joking. It is quite bad enough when they assemble together, to stare at one another, and (or one neighbor to ask who called the meeting? what have we met to do ? whore arc the promoters of it? No one in such oases likes even to preside : there is a tendency with (.-very person present to ho in a bad humor, because he feels himself gulled ; and if at the last something like business is improvised, just because men do not like to meet, to do nothing, and go home and be laughed at by their wives and neighbors, the whole proceedings arc utterly worthless, for they are the result of impulse rather than reflection. But this is nut the worst phase of the matter. Although nothing worth the trouble of meeting together for was done at the Leith Ward meeting, it was evidence of a desire somewhere to place the public institutions of Dunedin under the influence of the “ stump.” There are always at a gathering, like pickpockets at a lair, certain busybodies, who seem to think their peculiar mission is to insult every respectable man who expresses las willingness to give time and attention to public business. It is nut that they have any peculiar talent. In fact, so far Irom that, they are shallow-brained and presumptuous, with an amazing fondness for hearing themselves talk. As a relief to the dry details of a public meeting, their antics are endurable, just as the frolics of a monkey serve to amuse while more serious work is in preparation. But unforuinatfly they cannot be led off the stage like munkevs, Jf they are attempted to be restrained, they claim the privilege of being considered rational beings, and fume and rave, like maniacs at large, about British liberty and Englishmens rights, forgetful that they are constantly drawing very largely upon the good nature and politeness of other people. .Some of them pay rates—some do not; but no matter, they claim the right to bully. Wo are glad to say that the good sense ol the people of Dunedin lias latterly, on several occasions, been vindicated by meetings refusing to listen to these—what may almost be called professional men of “ the slumpand in proportion as they are discountenanced, public meetings will become valuable. It has always been very easy to find fault with men holding public oiliccs, and it is always diJlicult for them to defend their conduct. No man likes to talk too much about himself; for if he tells of the sacrifices he has made in the service of the public, there is a tendency to charge him with self-seeking and vain-glory. On the other hand, it ho does not explain what he has done or left undone, he allows the charges against him so freely brought by the “ Stump” to be assumed to be. unanswerable. When he tells the truth, the li stump ” do not, or profess not to believe him. They sit in judgment on the conduct of public men, ami judging them by their own crooked standard and imperfect knowledge, they are apt to term wrong “ right ” and light “ wrong,” and sometimes succeed in persuading men so. The ” stump,” therefore, has a tendency

to prevent really competent men from coming forward. They are not honest opponents : they have an itching for popularity, and they spare no reputation if by direct charge, insinuation, logical trap, even positive falsehood or the use of one or other of such instruments, they can flutter for a moment before a crowd, who greet the in with laughter or applause, ft is the interest of the public to put down the “ stump,” because if it is maintained as an institution, there is always a temptation for the unscrupulous to make use of it to serve their own purposes; and as honorable men despise such auxilaries, the chances are that the least to be trusted are the most likely to be elected. We do not wish Mr Barnes to suppose, in what we are about to say, that we associate him with the affair in Leith Ward, or with the observations we have made respecting the “ stump.” He has done his duty as a representative of Leith Ward, and wo do not want to see him make the mistake that common report says he is likely to fall into. It is generally said that he purposes resigning because he cannot work with Mr Thoneman. He was not sent to the Council to be either the tutor or the driver of Mr Thoneman, who, equally with himself, is the choice of the ratepayers of the Ward, If Mr Barnes disagrees with Mi Tiioxemax, the Council is the arbiter of right and wrong. It is quite as much within the cards that Mr Thonemax may be as right as Mr JBarxes—at any rate the two may very honestly differ with advantage to the ratepayers. It is too stumpy a step to take to resign on such grounds, and might chance to deprive the Ward ot Mr Barnes’s services.