THE GLOBE. TUESDAY, MARCH 29, 1881. MR. BRYCE AND THE "LYTTELTON TIMES" SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT.

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 2212, 29 March 1881, Page 2

THE GLOBE. TUESDAY, MARCH 29, 1881. MR. BRYCE AND THE "LYTTELTON TIMES" SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT.

The " Lyttolton Times" has received from its special correspondent his reply to the charges made against him by Mr. Bryce in his speech at Wanganui. The public will probably feel surprised that our contemporary should have mutilated A report coming from an impartial source, with a view of allowing the party accused an opportunity of reply. Tho reply might well have come in due course of time. It certainly throws discredit on all reports issued by our contemporary when we know that they are liable to be doctored for interested reasons. Besides the principle, if once admitted, would be productive of journalistic chaos. If the " LytteUon Times" applies it to its special correspondent why not to its political partizans in general ? The idea introduces an element of instability and chicanery into the whole system of newspaper reporting highly undesirable. Take the present instance. Mr. Bryce, in the course of his speech at Wanganui, makes certain remarks respecting a certain individual. Our contemporary, ostensibly reporting a summary of the speech as delivered, carefully cuts out this portion of the speech. If a full report had not appeared in another paper, would or would not the words have been completely burked ? But even supposing the " Lyttelton Times" to have acted from the commencement with a perfectly honest intention of giving tho words afterwards with the correspondent's version of the facts affixed, what then ? The public have still a perfect right to complain of the mutilation of the speech. What guarantee have they that other speeches are not treated in the same way ? To say the least of it, tho new element introduced by our contemporary into newspaper reporting is not straightforward, and is calculated to lower journalism in the public estimation. After reading the reply of the special correspondent, there will be no doubt of one thing, namely, that this individual is a remarkably slippery gentleman. He answers Mr. Bryce's charges with great address. But we would beg to point out that the question is ono of credibility only. Either Mr. Bryce has grossly exaggerated, or the " special" has. Mr. Bryce says the correspondent was always trying to get money out of the Government, and the reply is that the latter was merely wanting to be paid for work done. Mr. Bryce says that the correspondent wrote to him for the appointment of private secretary, and the latter replies that he did so with a view of getting to the front, inferring that he had some sort of previous understanding with Mr. Bryce on the subject, for otherwise his letter would have been quite meaningless in the sense in which it was intended. Finally, Mr. Bryce says that the officers at Werekino were utterly sick of the correspondent, while the correspondent's version of the story is that the officers were devotedly attached to him—and that to such an extent that all of them not on duty sat up with him till three o'clock in the morning [P to drink whiskey and weep over him] but that he was turned out of the mess by order of Mr. Bryce himself. Mr. Bryce's version and the correspondent's vorsion are so utterly diverse that it is impossible to say that both men are telling the whole truth. Now Mr. Bryce is a man of honour, probity, and straightforwardness. His speech was a plain, unvarnished statement of facts as they occurred and it throws light on a career remarkably free from double dealing. His very secession from the Ministry proves him to be s. man of his word, little likely to seek private gain at the risk of his honour. And such a man publicly makes statements about the correspondent of the '' Lyttelton Times." Mr. Bryce says that the correspondent was constantly trying to get money out of the Government—he does not say that he was merely trying to be paid for work done. Mr. Bryce says that the correspondent wanted to be his private secretary —he does not say that it was merely as a way of getting to the front. Mr. Bryce says that the officers at Werekino were heartily sick of the "special." We prefer to believe Mr. Bryce rather than the correspondent. For what claims has the latter on the confidence of the public p Setting aside everything else, look at that miserable Waimate Swamp business. The only upholder of this stupendous fabrication at the present moment is the "Lyttelton Times," which is still fatuous enough to endeavour to bolster it up. The world at large has laughed at it and forgotten it; a Greyite member of the House went on a special mission to find this swamp, and utterly failed. But the inventor of this story, a man who stuck to it month after month, and still does so for aught wo know to the contrary, is still trusted by tho "lyttelton Times," and its readers are invited to swallow his effusions with avidity and implicit faith. But we fancy the public will be little likely to hesitate as to which of the two stories now before the public should be accepted. As wo have said above, it is a pnre matter of the credibility of the two narrators. We trust to hear further of this matter shortly, and we hope that, when more particulars do arrive, the " Lyttelton Times" will not be over nervous, but will, for once in a way, publish them in their entirety, leaving tho lucubrations of its correspondent to follow in due course.

SABBATH OBSERVANCE.

The public will be glad to see that at yosterday's mooting of the Board of Governors it was resolved to open the Public Library for certain hours on Suudays. "Wo had all along expected that, when a full meeting of the Board took place, there would be a large majority in favour of this course, but wo certainly thought that the objectors would have made a better fight of it, and brought forward more cogent reasons than were adduced. Theßev.CFraser.who spoke most strongly on tho question and led tho attack, seems not to have grasped tho fact that there are floating units in tho community who have no opportunity of joining family gatherings such as ho describes, and that it is for such people as these that tho opening of the library is intended. We quite agree with Mr,

Bowen that it was equally fair to discuss why the library should not be opened as why it should. Mr. Hamilton's bugbear as to the employment of the library officials a bugbear ho appears to have clung to notwithstanding all explanations—having been once disposed of, Mr. Bowen's proposition is self evident. It can hardly be said that this question has exorcised public attention to any very great extent, simply because it was considered that the good sense of the Board would lead it to the conclusion arrived at without further bother. A minority have excited themselves strongly, but have failed, and, although we sympathise with them as with individuals carrying with them the courage of their convictions, yet we feel confident that, as time goes on, they will reconcile themselves to the change, and will confess that the terrible disasters which they have predicted will not follow tho Sunday opening of tho Library.