The Globe. TUESDAY, AUGUST 6, 1878.

Globe, Volume XX, Issue 1396, 6 August 1878, Page 2

The Globe. TUESDAY, AUGUST 6, 1878.

Who does not recollect tho hue and cry with which the Government organs pursued Major Atkinson and his friends on account of the so-called destruction of the triumphal arch erected at New Plymouth during Sir George Grey’s stumping visit there p The Ministers had then a journalistic trumpeter hanging to their coat-tails, whose oral and literary effusions were prominently recorded in various parts of tho Australasian group not long before, and whoso position as a partizau writer is but too well defined just now. What was flashed through tho electric wires on that momentous occasion, by tho gentleman in question, to the majority of Greyite organs, took away people’s breath for a time, involving as it did two members of Parliament in a charge of larrikinism, which Ministerialists, struck with horror, piously denounced as absolutely treasonable. To Mr. Richmond Hursthouse, however, more than to his supposed brother M.H.R., the late Premier, most of the stigma attached, and a not inconsiderable amount of tho mud which was thrown at that eventful time also stuck. What was disseminated broadcast as true and correct facts by tho literary friends of the Ministers, who did, at last, pass under that famous arch, was as follows: “ Richmond Hursthouse, member of Parliament for Motueka, Nelson, had mounted by a ladder and was astride of the arch, fastening a rope for the purpose of hauling it down, when Sergeant Duffiu appeared on the scene and ordered him to come down. Hursthouse replied that ho was a member of Parliament, and warned the sergeant not to interfere with him. Duffiu told him ho should be ashamed of himself in such a position, and did not care whether or not; ho must come down.” This extract, wo may state, was taken by us from the telegraphic message of the “ Own Correspondent” of the Ola (jo Daily Times , who was then in New Plymouth; promiscuously no doubt. Tho same words also appeared in the Lyttelton Times’ telegraphic message, also under tho heading “From our Own Correspondent.” How tho Ministerial papers revelled over this delicate morceau, and rung the changes out of it in every conceivable tune, has long become a matter of history. Mr. Hursthouse, strange to say, remained quiet, and virtually allowed this malicious falsehood to be utilised in poisoning the public ear. But every dog, they say, has his day. Last week, and as soon as Parliament had been formally opened, the member for Motueka moved for tho production of, tho papers connected with this arch spoliation case, and ho not only proved the impurity of the base fabrications which had been circulated at his expense, and to his discredit, but also that the Ministers had all along been in full possession of tho true merits of tho case, while prudently allowing themselves to be guided by that good old Machiavelislic motto of suppressiu veri, suyyestio falsi. Far from having been detected by the police “astride the arch,” Mr. Hursthouse was actually miles away at the time. Furthermore, tho arch had been erected by the instructions of a minority of three of a reception committee composed of nine persons. These three worthies had dug two holes in the street for the limbs of the arch against tho expressed wish of the Mayor The literary friend of the Minister of Justice, to whom we have made allusion, had been allowed to copy the report—evidently a “ cooked,” if not fictitious one —of the local police, and send it throughout the colony, while those who were charged by it were denied a glance at it. The Minister of Justice, we find, in trying to throw oil upon the Parliamentary waters, which Mr. Hursthouse was succeeding in ruffling considerably, made a singularly lame defence. While, in his speech in reply, he was good enough to accept the proofs of what he called an alibi, he so far forgot his usual caution as to admit that when ordering the Taranaki police to take no legal steps in prosecuting tho offenders, ho did so purely on account of “ the respectability of the accused;” i.e, Mr. R. Hursthouse, who was well-known to have been miles away at the time of the occurrence! How, wo would ask, will Sir George Grey reconcile this statement of his colleague with those protestations of his about the working man’s welfare, and his ineffable desire that there should bo “ but one law for tho rich or for the poor,” let alone “ a free breakfast table. Correspondents from Wellington have informed us that this little Parliamentary episode, in which a story six mouths old was twice told, but in a very different fashion, lias created a most unfavourable impression on unprejudiced people s minds. And wo do not- wonder at it. As Mr. Hursthouse plainly put it, tho whole affair of this New Plymouth arch, with its subsequent mythical framing of an anonymous police charge-sheet and telegraphic disseminations of malicious falsehoods, scorned to have boon got up by certain persons much interested in blinding public opinion for the purpose of damaging tho names oi others politically opposed to tho Government now in office. And to sum up this eeemiiigly trivial Parliamentary episode,

how is it that tho Police Court records of Now Plymouth wore not produced by Mr. Sheehan, instead of the attention and time of the House being 1 wasted as it was by wordy and interminable recriminations ? The whole thing does indeed reflect discredit upon tho Government, who. perhaps, will in due time find that honesty, in those matters, is the best policy after all.

What are the Wellington authorities about in the matter of tho judicial changes which, it was officially asserted some weeks ago, would be effected hero before the beginning of the month ? Wo learn from Wellington, on the best possible authority, that Mr. Mellish, R.M., is is not going to Timaru in tho place of Captain Woolcombo, as arranged. Mr. Richard Beethara, tho present Resident Magistrate of Napier, who had received his route for Christchurch, will, we are further informed, step into tho Timaru R.M.’ship in a few days, and as to the opening of the newly found District Court for North Canterbury, wo believe that Judge Ward does not assume duty for at least a fortnight. The reason for the now clwssezcroise which is to take place in tho Resident Magistrate world of Canterbury is due, it is said, to a protest of Mr. Mellish against being shifted to a Court of inferior importance. Wo have no doubt but that tho Timaru people will rejoice at the advent of Mr Richmond Boetham, who boars tho name of being a gentleman of high judicial attainments, and possessing both tact and temper.