The Nelson Evening Mail. MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 16,

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume VII, Issue 221, 16 September 1872, Page 2

The Nelson Evening Mail. MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 16,

The ''Nelson] Examiner is apparently "j l believer in rhVdbctririe of infallibility as applied ;to \thej Superintendent. ;-?In <Mr. Curtis it sees a man .who by no .possibility whatever can do ;wrong,/. who,.^indeed,is almost inhuman, inasmuch as he cannot err. .Our contemporary is, a bold end faithful champion of our. present Superintendeoti but one. who would. serve the cause of His chief far better if his courage were tempered with judgment. We have incurred his displeasure by having occasionally ventured to suggest, that a little more energy, a trifle less of inaction on the part of Mr. Curtis might have been attended with more beneficial results to the Province of which. he is, the elected head. For this we are accused of "carping at" end "misrepresenting" Lira. As for misrepresentation, nothing has been farther from pur thoughts, and we sincerely trust that impartialreaders have seen nothing in any remarks we have ■made to induce them to endorse this charge against us; with regard to "carping at" his Honor, if an occasional friendly criticism, a pointing out where we believed he might have acted more iv the interests of the Province, can be thus characterised, then we at once plead guilty, nor do we do so with any sense of contrition, any idea of repentance, but with a full intention of repeating the offence — if offence it be— whenever occasion may require it. The head and front of our offending in the present instance, the sin that has earned for us a reproof from the Examiner, is that we have ventured to institute a .comparison, unfavorable to the latter, between the action .taken 'in connection with the Public Works scheme by Mr. Seymour, on the one hand, as Superintendent of Marlborough, and by Mr. "Curtis, on the other, as Superintendent ,of Nelson. The Picton and Blenheim railway is fairly commenced. This, we consider, is entirely owing to the laudable energy and persistence displayed by Mr. Seymour. Towards theFoxhili line nothing has been done beyond the preliminary survey. This we attribute to some extent to the cotnparative^inertness of Mr. Curtis. The reply with which we are met is that we are entirely wrong in assuming that Mr. Curtis evinced: any lokewarmness in the matter, for did he not make a special visit to Wellington and obtain a distinct promise that the work should be immediately proceeded^with ? Of course he did, and we give 'him ; full credit, for successfully performing a very difficult task, but why ■did he stop there ? If one special visit was, Jnecessary to extract the promise, twoor three more were requisite to ensure its .fulfilment; / Why wore these not made ? |To our knowledge, Mr. Seymour performed the pilgrimage across the Straits three distinct times r before-; he obtained what he wanted. ; He was not content with a promise, which he estimated at its '■ right value., butjhe/ had set his heart 4 w hearing the sound of the pjekaxe In tjie Waitohi Valley, before the meeting, of the i Assembly, and perseverance and determination carried the day. , . •;''.'.!' I: . « We are jtold , that >it is funfair to' Mr. : ' Curtis to give ";Mr.; Seymour's ; presumed greater energy and earheetness credit fon the priority which the-Mariboro^gh'^ine^ rece|?ed/Vaa, that ? yailway^,f*,b^taiiiea:-pre-, ! j' |cedence. over' othersbecauee it had already been surveyed, and contracts for its 'con-' ■ Btru6tion -could "ati once^be^ entered 1 ta'to, 5 while for the Nelson and Foxhill ljine 1 ;^ suryV!ftd*'be:;^ a misetatement of 1 * ,'".p* Vtrue that a ' -survey had at one timebieen made, but it proved to be altogether^TDffelessy and the work had to .be gone , over again 4e novo, |co that the two lines together. ■~slT' beymour, noweverj-saw the advantage ;;':ttie; digfi^ ; merepromjs^ |he. pressed his demand with Bflchimpo

was interested^ |lj,ould be the first to bo submitted for Nie^qfe^ Such being the r? r|al^^sj§fAe^c|s|lw(^are unnble to aee.g flat ftis tim\rtts Mr.fGurtis 'to cive Mri : 'i« S^ym^f^'s^ffpt but actual— rip greater energy arid credit for the commencement of the works in Marlborough. Suppose the action taken by the two S,u per i n ten dents to! h avejbeen re versed , . what .'would be the res^ectivy. results ? Ts any one sufficiently credulous to believe that if Mr. Seymour ..had, Jike, Mr. Curtis, rested on his oars after extracting an unwilling promise fromMiuisteis^ the works on the Picton line would havebeen entered upon? On the other band — judging by. , the fruits of Mr. Seymour's perseverance —is it probable that .if;:alike<pertinacity bad been displayed' by Mr. Curtis, nothing would have been done in Nelson beyond the preliminary Burvey ? , We repeat that the Examiner, acting as Mr. C.urtis's champion, was scarcely, judicious io cbal-, lenging us to ,, give our,, 'reasons ;for alleging that if the v ; Su.perin-tendent of 'Nelson had thrown himself into the work he had in hand with, 'the' same energy, that characterised .the action taken by; ?the /Superintendent of . Morlborougb; the Foxhill line would nowr be in a far' more i advanced stage. than is at, present the case. ' A passing .allusion, to, the delay which has; taken place in commencing , the gasworks also, meets with: the disapproval of our contemporary jj'whb says th'a'tj owing tp the necessity of, a change in. the. site,' a fresh Act was necessftry. We. shall not go into the. question- just, now, but, if it be necessary, we think this can easily be rshown to be but a very poor excuse for the extended delay which ' has already occurred, and 'is likely to be still' further prolonged. '' '„ The principle adopted by the Examiner: appears to be. to refuse to give tho slightest credit to a political opponent for any good qualities he may possess, and to shut its eyes to any failings ; or weaknesses that may be exhibited by the man or party to ' whom it affords a general support. We do " not bold with this idea of the duties of a newspaper, but are disposed to think that good results will often /follow ; the pointing out of a fault by a. friendly disposed critic, while indiscriminate, praise and flattery can carry no weight with the general public, and must frequently bring a smile to the object of it, who^ if he be not an utter fool, will soon learn to estimate such excessive" laudation at its true value. At the time of Mr. Curtis' election as Superintendent we afforded him'a hearty ' support, and so far from regretting' it, we say without hesitation, that, ccelcris paribus, we should do the same again, but we. •did not then, any more than now, believe him. to be faultless, nor did we consider that by, doing what we could to secure his election 'we were binding ourselves to be for the future blind to all his little failings. Before concluding, we have one word to, say on a personal matter. 'In the. article; before us there openrs the following paragraph :— " That Mr; Curtia; would riot, sacrifice his principles and support a Go-, vernment he was opposed to in order to. hasten by a few .weeks the commencement of a great public work for' his province, may be-perfectly true, "and if fault is found | * with him for this, we shall, offer nothing on his behalf. Bufc r the i, Mail is quite, wrong in assuming that Mr. Curtis evinced any lukewarmness over the. Nelson and Foshill rail way. " ; ' The inference that was, clearly intended t6 be drayd from this ; is that we have shown & dispo-' ! sition to cavil " at "tfre v Superinten r ;. ! , dent for not' sacrificing his I ' pVinciples" and supporting a Government to which he yraa opposed. '■ The insinuation is utterly unjustifiable, and none knows this. better >tban our contemporary, who made it.