Nelson Evening Mail. FRIDAY, JUNE 4, 1881.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XVI, Issue 132, 4 June 1881, Page 2

Nelson Evening Mail. FRIDAY, JUNE 4, 1881.

At the nomination yesterday Mr Levestam replied to our criticisms in his address and bis comments will be found elsewhere. His speech was weak and labored to a degree and delivered with the unmistakable air of a man who is painfully conscious that he is wearying his hearers. We have but one word to say on this subject. Mr Levestam said *• The star " (referring to the Mail) " then became muddled, and said that Mr Levestam had objected to land being sold for cash or on deferred payments, but he had said nothing of the kind, but only that he did not approve of its being sold in large blocks at Jpw prices." Now in prger to s|ow that the

"star"— why Mr Levestam has displayed such gross ingratitude to his patron, the Colon : st, as to transfer to U3 the nickname bestowed upon him by it we are unable to say — in order to show that wo were not so muddled as Mr Levestam would make out, we quote what we did say:— "MrLevostnm's next point was the administrations of the lands. He objected to the?r being sold as they were noio either for cash or on deferred payments " By the omission of the words italicised Mr Levestam altered the meaning of what we said, as ho will at once see. In a communicated — and we have reason to belive authoritative — report of Mr Leveßtatn's meeting at the Port last night we read with the utmost surprise the following sentence : — " Mr Laveatam explained that what he understood by protection in the jam manufacture was, not to increase the duty upon the imported article, but to allow the colonial jam manufacturer to have his sugar duty free-" Now, if this is what Mr Levestaiu really me^nt at tha time, we can only say that he did not e&prcCß himself with his customary Clearness, for what he said was as follows (he wag Bpeaking at the time of the Nelson, and Motueka jam factories) : — " His opinion was that instead of giving bonuses thty should place a iVnatl protective duty on local mauufactures, so that everyone might reap the advantage."— 'Colonist report. " The proper way to encourage such industries was to piaife a XmaU protective duiy on the imported article, not such as to enable men or companies to make large fortunes, but just suflicient to enable the'o) to compete with the imported article.'*— Evening Mail report. We should like to ask whether anyone in the room who heard Mr Levestam's speech gathered from it any such idea aa that which he now says was running in his head at the time ; or whether anyone who reads the above extracts can possibly place such an interpretation upon them as that claimed for them by Mr Levestam ? When a candidate begins to hedge so transparently, and, we may add, bo wildly, just on the eve of an election it is a sad betrayal of weakness. Far, far better would it have been for Mr Levesfcam had he stood by his first speech, instead of thus openly eating his words. Thk Wellington fcorrespondenfc of the Lyttellon lima whose reputation as a romancer is widespread, telegraphed to that journal the other day that Mr Pitt had decided upon throwing over his allegiance to the Hall Government, Mr Pitt having been telegraphed to with a view to ascertaining whether this statement was correct or not |j»a replied that there is no truth whatever in it and that nothing is further from his intention. This is only one of many specimens of the utterly unfounded rumors which owe their origin to the same source; The Customs receipts for the week ending this day amounted to £835 17a 2d. In the list of coses set down for hearing in the Resident Magistrate's Court on Tuesday one was stated to be Levieu v. Stallard. We have been requested to alter this to Levien v. F. Stallard,