The Lyttelton Times.

Lyttelton Times, Volume VI, Issue 369, 17 May 1856, Page 6

The Lyttelton Times.

Saturday i ISlay 17. We have observed with great regret that our own columns, and those of our contemporary the "' Standard," teem with exceedingly violent expressions of opinion, or rather of prejudice. We must certainly protest against such a method of argument. We cai-.not see how a conclusion having sound reason for its basis, can grow out of loud accusations of attempt? to rob laid on one hand, and retorted on the other in similarly scandalous charges. In the present difference of opinion, it appears to us that individuals have lost sight of the first point towards which it is necessary attention should be directed, and which should be definitely determined, before proceeding to discuss the policy to be adopted in reference to such determination. It is first necessary to decide upon the legal reality of preemptive rights, before we proceed to their extinction. It must be borne in mind that we have free access to constitutional tribunals, learned and wise to enquire into the existence of rights or wrongs, and clothed with justice and power, to enforce the one or restrain the other. Why, then, should the public seek to assert a., influence where it is incompetent to enforce or interdict? Would not the public of this Province best preserve its reputation for superior intelligence, by simply confining its attempts to act, to those affairs wherein there is at least a fair chance of successful action ?

Without the assistance of lawyers, we all know the vehement assertion of public opinion is entirely unavfuling to lead, and perfectly powerless to prevent or resist, the

conclusions of the high authority to which (we believe) the final decision as to the value of the pre-emptive rights will be ultimately referred. An appeal to courts of law is a vexatious and unpleasant, procedure, to be avoided if possible. This can only be done by the public through their Council taking pains to ascertain the real position of rtlie* case —such a knowledge cannot result from the process now eraployed.

The existing state of things reminds us of the case of two neighbours who went to law : one of whom was so utterly absorbed in a desire to win, so entirely occupied in the enjoyment, by anticipation of success, and so perfectly satisfied with his own notions of propriety, that he quite foigot to compare them with the standard that was to measure the difference between himself and his antagonist. Upon going to trial, however, he unfortunately found that his own honest block-headed notion of fair play did not meet the concurrence of the judge, * and consequently he had the mortification of losing his suit. The moral of this story is to the effect that whenever "

we desire a particular end, we should, at the same time, labour to learn whether the indispensable means to that end are within our reach.

We hear it asserted as an"indisputable fact that the maintenance of the right of pre-emption is a very serious impediment to the sale of lands, and that it is very desirable that it should be removed. But we would remind ministers that they cannot divest themselves of the entertainment of another very simple proposition, namely,— that such removal must have the authority of law.