Hawke's Bay Times. Nullius addictus jurare in verba magistri. THE RIVAL TELEGRAM COMPANIES.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume 19, Issue 1475, 8 November 1872, Page 2

Hawke's Bay Times. Nullius addictus jurare in verba magistri. THE RIVAL TELEGRAM COMPANIES.

The motto adopted by Grevillc and Co.'s Telegram Company— l * We serve favor none"—is well descriptive of tlio anti-party character essential to such a company, which depends for its success* upon the support of organs of every shade of political opinion. To give a party bia3 to the news it supplies to the press would be a suicidal act, and we believe that in Greyille's

agency, as at present, constituted, such an eiTor is as far as possible avoided. The contrast that has of late existed between Grevillu's telegrams, as published in our columns, and those supplied to our local contemporaries by the Associated Pre*?, cannot fail to have struck the readers of the Hawke's Bay papers. It appears to be the practice of tho latter to send no item of political news to its patrons except such as can be made to tell in favor of the Government party, and the Hawke's Bay public would have been altogether deprived of several very important items of such news had they not been telegraphed to us by Greville & Co. A report of the meeting at Welliug-1 ton on Tuesday evening last, of Messrs. Pearce and Hunter and their constituents, was published in considerable detail in this journal on Wednesday, from which it plainly appears that the impression which has been pretty generally felt, that tho:-*e gentlemen had given much dissatisfaction to their constituents by their course of action during the past session of the Assembly, is correct; and the report of the same meeting furnished by the Associated Press to our contemporaries, though much more condensed, is, a* far as it extends, confirmatory of the same. Those gentlemen, it appears, could not even obtain a hearing, neither could any of their supporters who tried to get a vote of confidence in them passed; while their opponents were not only listened to, but were enthusiastically received and greatly cheered. As an attempt on the part of Messrs. Pearce and Hunter to set themselves right with their constituents the meeting was an evident failure, and the most striking lesson to be drawn fiom the proceeding is that had those two gentlemen done their duty to their constituents, by lepiesenting their views, Mr Vogel would not have been replaced in office. We observe, however, that our morning contemporary informs us that it has a private telegram relative to the same affair, from which they learn that the result of the meeting was as satisfac tory to Messrs. Pearce and Hunter, and to their friends, as could possibly be desired. It goes on to say that this was the first opportunity on which their conduct could receive the public approval which it merited' It is to. be noted, however, that it does not say that it did receive such—and, in the face of the fact that the vote of confidence was not put to the meeting at all, it Aould have been going rat her too far to have said so, though it is quite evident that such i* the impression desired to be produced. We note one discrepancy in the telegrams : the As sociated Press describes Mr T» avers' amendment, which was put to the meeting (though not carried) as being to the effect that, the electors approved of the manner in which these representatives discharged their duties, which would have been virtually the vote of coufidence in other words, and which Mr Travers cenainly would not be the one to have proposed. According to Greville's telegram, which appears to be correct, it was simply the usual vote of thanks to the Chairman for his conduct in the chair.