The Globe. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 3, 1878.

Globe, Volume IX, Issue 1261, 3 April 1878, Page 2

The Globe. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 3, 1878.

THE Lyttelton Times has again lost his temper at some remarks we made the other day, and so he sets the Star to abuse us. The article which appeared in Monday's issue of our evening contemporary is intended, we presume, as an answer to a leader in Saturday's Globe. If such is the case it is but another specimen of the " reasoning" which so distinguishes our Gloucester street friends. Yet what has the Globe done to deserve all the abuse heaped upon it ? Our guilt consists, it would appear, in our inability to grasp the chain of reasoning running through a series of articles which have appeared in the columns of our contemporary. That wonderful series began with describing Sir G. Grey as politically unreliable, and ended with grovelling at his feet in slavish adulation —with first picturing the dreadful consequences to the " working man" of a reduction of the Customs tariff, and concluded with advocating that very change in the interests of the same class. Is it to be wondered at that we fail to grasp the chain of reasoning which runs through such a series ? Our venerable friend in Cathedral square may have heard of the discussions which have taken place on the difference between reason and instinct. There are those who hold that there is no real difference between them, that they are but the higher and lower manifestation of the same quality. We cannot help thinking that the " reasoning" which runs through a series of articles in the Lyttelton Times partakes more of the lower. What our contemporary calls " reason " we should in his case call " instinct" —the ins+inct of being always on the winning side. On Saturday we drew attention to the fact that a few months ago our old friend was greatly troubled about the momentous consequences which he predicted would follow if the Customs duties on certain articles wore reduced, and direct taxation imposed. Not only would the capitalist and the employer of labour suffer, our contempo. rary was chiefly concerned ahthit the " working man," on account of the distress that would follow. At the time we endeavoured to expose the transparent cant of such a style of argument. We showed that if the present tariff had the effect of supporting a number of " pauper industries," it was monstrous to argue that they should be kept going out of the public purso—that the whole colony be taxed in order to put money in the pockets of a few manufacturers. At that time, however, the Lyttelton

then he has changed his opinion. He has now come round to the view we have held, that tho Customs tariff should be reduced, and a direct tax imposed. But, in advocating this entirely opposite view of the question, he does not change his stock argument. Tho " working man" still does duty. Our friend has got hold of the idea that it is the correct thing to patronise the hardy son of toil, and so, whethor ho is arguing for or against a change in the incidenco of taxation, the inevitable working man must be dragged in. At one time we are warned by the Lyttelton Times against touching the Customs tariff because he would suffer, at another we are urged to reduce it in the interests of the same class. And yet the Star abuses us because wo cannot follow the chain of "reasoning" which runs through the articles appearing in the Times. Our friend thinks we study these articles in order to educate ourselves and our readers politically. We certainly do so, but not in the spirit our contemporary flatters himself we do. It is in order that we may present to our readers a frightful example of a political career to he shunned. History tells us that once a year the youth of a certain city in Greece were brought together to witness a melancholy spectacle—that of a crowd of slaves in all stages of intoxication. This was done to show the vice of intemperance in its most degrading colors. The spectacle was certainly not one to be gloated over, but for the sake of their children the citizens insisted on their presence. In a somewhat similar spirit we have from time to time exposed tho inconsistencies of the Times, But the task is far from a pleasant one, and nothing but a sense of duty forces us to undertake it. If in the performance of it wo have hurt the feelings of our old friend, we are sorry for it. If however in future he throws away self-s-eking and tries to discuss questions on their merits, we will do our best to make the change known to our readers. Above all things we urge him to drop his cant about the " working man." That particular class are not flattered by such shallow professions, and are sure to resent such assistance. We can assure our friend that an honest adhesion to principle pays just as well as endeavouring to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds.