THE GLOBE. WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 27, 1880. SAINT SAUNDERS.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 2083, 27 October 1880, Page 2

THE GLOBE. WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 27, 1880. SAINT SAUNDERS.

Nothing can have been more rabid than the attack made on Mr. Saunders, because ho is supposed to have advocated repudiation. That he would have deserved all that ho has received if he had in reality made the suggestion is perfectly true, but in point of fact he did nothing of the sort. A Mr. Paap was the gentleman who asked Mr. Saunders what would he the effect of repudiation. "Whether the question was one made from motives of pure curiosity, or whether Mr. Paap’s childlike and bland physiognomy was a mere mask for some sinister design either on Mr. Saunders or the country at large, is not known. But, this now historical Mr. Paap was the man who was rash enough to mention the word. The reporter of the speech, however, totally ignored this fact, and fixed the objectionable suggestion on the hack of the speaker himself. Reporters are hut mortal and are liable to make mistakes, and sometimes to stick to them with a pleasing pertinacity, and in this case the erring child of Pitman’s system has refused to acknowledge he was wrong, leaving it to be inferred that Mr. Paap is a fiction, a species of Kaikonrian Mrs. Harris, invented by Mr. Saunders or somebody else with a view to shunting on his shadowy shoulders the suggestion of the possibility of repudiation. Now, we can hardily credit that such can be the case, for, if Mr. Paap does not exist, the fact would he soon ascertained, for the Kaikouras are not so very far off—indeed on a clear day, can be seen from our bedroom windows. If, on the other, Mr, Paap is really in the flesh and has unjustly been credited with a sin that does not belong to him, then it is very certain that he will sooner or later, either by person or letter, indignantly deny the accusation and show the world what an inhabitant of Kaikoura can do when once thoroughly roused. Seeing then the risk of burdening a real or imaginary Paap with this word “repudiation,” unless there were grounds for the accusation, we are decidedly of opinion that Mr. Saunders was guiltless in the matter, and that the report published in our columns on Monday last was quite correct, and that Mr. Saunders merely explained that the effect of repudiation would he for us to lose our place among respectable nations, and that from that day forth a New Zealander would not be able to look an honest man in the face.

Jumping eagerly, however, at the report as first given to the world, and gladly seizing an opportunity to trounce the member for Cheviot, the Opposition press has gone in for crucifying him with much gusto. For Mr. Saunders is perhaps more hated by the Grey element than any other member in the House. The enormity of his starting with a belief in Sir G. Grey and then averring that he found out that ho was a humbug, has never been, and never will be, forgiven by his adversaries. Their dictionaries are dog-eared with their search after such words as “ rat ” and “ renegade ” to be applied to Mr. Saunders, and the fact that ho hits out lustily in his new metier makes him all the more obnoxious.

But in the present case the Opposition press have overshot the mark. They have made a martyr of the member for Cheviot. Some meifi have fairly earned the crown of martyrdom; others have it thrust upon them. The former process is the fruit of unbounded faith and courage, the latter merely requires a considerable number of rabid and unreasoning enemies. Let these necessary promoters of fame once start determined to annnihilate an adversary regardless of rhyme and reason, and the object of their hatred, by a necessary reaction, becomes a martyr in the eyes of the public. At the present moment Saint Saunders, the political martyr, is an object of great interest, the more so that he is a martyr of an entirely new type. There is totally wanting in him any of that meekness and lamblike capacity for turning the other cheek when struck on the one that has always been credited to the approved saint. He is horribly aggressive, not to say occasionally vituperative, and the conventionalities of the calendar are utterly upset by his erratic movements. This, however, is not his fault, but that of his enemies. If they persist in placing him in such strange company, they must abide by the consequences. The more they persist in ignoring Mr. Paap, the higher will Saint Saunders’ fame arise as that of an aggrieved and maligned object of political animosity.