The Lyttelton Times.

Lyttelton Times, Volume IX, Issue 553, 20 February 1858, Page 4

The Lyttelton Times.

Saturday, February 20. We cannot pass over without comment the remarks made upon the Canterbury papers by other journals in New Zealand', on the ground of their want of those spicy per-

sonalities which appear to give a zest to the columns of some of our contemporaries in the eyes of., their readers. We extract from the "Nelson Examiner," the most respectable of New Zealand papers, the following" quiet but somewhat satirical comment :— The Canterbury news reaches to the 26th December. If the settlers there have any quarrels, they wisely keep them out of the newspapers; on Voltaire's principle, " layer sa Hngc sale chez soi." Walker, in his " Original," starts the idea that a man in a state of perfect health never gets dirty, that a natural principle of repulsion exists in the thoroughly sound man, which even throws off the dust from his boots in walking. May we hope that something analogous to this in their moral condition exists among our friends at Canterbury, and that no unseemly breakingsout or personal blotches deform their papers because they have none such in their moral constitution to get rid of? It is a consummation devoutly to be wished by all of us; but until that Milleniuna arrive, we must still continue, we suppose, to "Cleanse the foul bosom of the perilous stuff Which weighs upon the heart,'.' and appeal to public sympathy in our grievances, , and strive to "rouse public indignation against all ill-doers of whatever description.

The "New Zealander," of Auckland, accused us not long 1 ago of suppressing any news that might in the eyes of strangers appear discreditable to the province; and the "Wellington Independent," after some tolerably complimentary remarks, found fault with the "Lyttelton Times" for want of "emphasis." Now, it is rather remarkable, that the' charge that has been generally brought against the "Lyttelton Times" in this province is that of expressing its views too emphatically. Our contemporary, however, has, we presume, a different idea of the meaning of the word. Was that late issue of the "Wellington Independent," in which three private individuals' names were posted at the head of three different leading articles, each one devoted to the abuse <of its subject, a specimen of the emphatic style ? In such a sense, the Press both of Wellington and Auckland is very emphatic, and we yield the palm to them at once. Seriously speaking, we believe honestly that the c. Nelson Examiner' is.right, and that, so far as small political communities with large political powers go, this province is in a tolerably healthy state. But at the same time there is no doubt but that in this community as well as in others the press will have the duty cast upon it of " appealing to public sympathy in our grievances, and striving to rouse public indignation against all ill-doers of whatever description." And this is a duty which must not be shirked. There is room, however, to differ widely from some of our contemporaries as to the proper way of conducting a political warfare. We wish to be guided by this general principle in all such cases. The public conduct, behaviour, and manner of a man who voluntarily puts himself forward upon the political stage is fair subject for public criticism, and ought to be criticised; but a man's private life and private affairs or social differences are not a fit subject for the public press. We know that those of our contemporaries who think differently have a very low opinion of the abilities of a paper that does not know how to make the private life of a man's relations conducive, if necessary, to his downfall". They must let us go our ownway and we will let them go theirs. At the same time it would be-.very unfair to the public if an individual were allowed to foist himself upon them as a politician without being subject to criticism, and sometimes severe criticism, of his public behaviour. This is necessary ' in our modern days of popular Governments. The press is one of the elements of democracy ; and if one of the elements were weakened the public fabric would to a certain extent lost its balance. But the public should look upon any intrusion on the part of the press into private life with as much jealousy, as a free country would look upon the domiciliary visits of spies or detectives.

We own. the soft impeachment of our contemporaries, if by charges of suppressing- unpleasant facts and of being 1 wanting in emphasis they wish to imply that we have neither the ability nor inclination to rival the famous " war correspondent" of New York. But it would be unfair to this province to let them for one moment suppose that there are any public or political movements amongst us which ai'e not brought to light and discussed freely in the columns of the local press.