ORIGINAL CORRESPONDENCE.

New Zealander, Volume 9, Issue 735, 30 April 1853, Page 3

ORIGINAL CORRESPONDENCE.

To the Editor of the New-Zealaxder. Sir, —The Ministers of Christianity have not been unused to public criticism, nor need they shrink from it so long as they can cover themselves with the shield of truth. Three letters have appeared in the “Southern Cross ” of April 26, animadverting upon the “ Protestant Evangelical clergymen” who signed the Requisition to Colonel Wynyard, and 1 beg the privilege of making some remarks upon them. They are ail anonymous;— but we shall take it for granted that they were written in good faith, by professing Christians, as they claim to be. Their spirit is indeed that of persons professing very superior scrupulousness and spirituality—though they have an acrid llavour not quite reconeileable with such virtues. But let us assume that the fountain is clearer than the stream, and that some little feculency has been acquired with meandering over the columns of I he Southern Cross. It would therefore have been a sore trial to their humility at any time to rebuke even one reputable and blameless Christian Minister, much more must they have felt it so to censure nearly the entire clerical body of the Settlement. But that trial would be augmented in this instance by another, —the necessity which they felt to appear in print to reprimand so many “ elders,” of the various Christian societies. And then, we may picture them to ourselves when, with downcast eyes and sad hearts they step over some day after “family-worship” or “prayer-meet-ing,” to drop their communication into! —the ojicchox of the Southern Cross. The transition must have been something from the one atmosphere into the other ! Now truly we are not writing satire but sketching what every good man must have felt in the circumstances.' Nor will we intimate that the writers did not feel thus, for we suppose diem to be good men, and frame our arguments to them as such. We utterly distrust their judgment, but would speak temperately of their errors and even of their uncharitableness. And there is great uncharitableness discolouring the whole series, but especially the production signed 1 Citizen.” This writer has seen good to speak of Christian Ministers of Auckhnl and its ■vicinity as “ turbulent priests” ; by no means a gentle epithet, nor other than villifyiug and angry.

With this bitter phrase rankling in his heart he proceeded to record as a thing lamentable but undeniable that “ they love to see their names paraded in the public journals,” “ an untoward circumstance” “ occurring with frequency” j that they have a “ thirst for notoriety” and now, with “ unprecedented meddling,”—“ while their flocks are calmly deliberating as to what measures they shall adopt,” they “ rush into the field of action with all the political fury of the veriest worldlings.” Now how many grains of Christian love could the cunningest chemistry extract from this mass ot acrimony I Where is that generous judgment of others which marks the elevated Christian character which it may be presumed this critic would not demand from others if not possessed by himself ? But we regret to say that those letters proceed upon untruthful assumptions, though we hope not designedly. Yet surely in such a case a • this, more than ordinary precaution should have been taken against misconception. Some misgiving might fitly have been encouraged lest the conclusions should he inordinately wider than the premises. Now what are the facts ? Some respectable fellow-citizens brought to the houses of many and perhaps ot all the Ministers a requisition which they were invited to sign, if agreeable to their views. I doubt whether one of them bad heard of the Requisition until he was aske 1 to sign, or was afterwards in any way concerned in gathering the names which filled it. No sue i act has been adduced by their accusers. Can it be truthful then or just, upon the ground of this me fact , that they signed a requisition when asked , forthwith to publish in the Southern Cross a sweeping censure against no less than ten of the Clergymen of the neighbourhood, and against the Evangelical Alliance, and Colonel Wynyard, ex pressed too in the violent language quoted above ? Is there no eagerness to attack manifested here ? Can “ Citizen” he indeed a Christian and withhold an apology for having converted such a thing into a “ furious rush into the field” while “ their flocks were deliberating .” But indeed who can “ Citizen” be ? lie loftily tenders his forgiveness to the clergy “ for the exhumation from the tombs of Egypt, the mouldering ashes of its departed monarchs.” As “ Citizen” may he of the proud lineage of the ancient Pharoahs his forgiveness may m \ u something ; but we did not before know that the “ turbulent priests” had been invading these sepulchres. With some further forgivenes to these disturbers, “ Citizen” winds up his climax with the following appeal to the Editor of the Southern Cross'. “ May, we not, Sir, with great propriety question their fitness for the high office of spiritual guides” Surely C£ Citizeh” cannot he a very wise or a very modest personage even though lie should be of royal descent. And how long has the Editor o the Southern Cross been his authority in seeking ££ spiritual guides” ? Of the other two writers ii is but just to say that they are far less hitter than ££ Citizen”—but we cannot help thinking them all liable to heavy rebuke in that they have not only published exaggerated statements and severe reflections, but that they have closed so anonymously and without seeking first any explanation from the parties assailed. Anonymous correspondence is sometimes the cloud behind which the orb of Genius half conceals its lustre—sometimes the veil of modest worth, but quite as often it is the covert from behind which some mean assailant discharges Ins Parthian arrow. Surely men assuming such high principles as these writers do, cannot be of the latter class. But why had they not the courage to sign their work with their own name? it would k at least have been satisfactory to know that the letters do not derive their influence from their namclessness alone. It could not be that men so confident in their own superior information —and of the support of the “more sober part of the community” and “ many sensible and serious persons” would shrink from the censure which their candour might bring upon them. Wo are willing to acquit even “ Citizen” of a malign intention — but we ask is not the aspect of the letters malign ? Judging from their appearance only would not they be liable to be considered the device of a chagrined partisan—or the unadvised utterance of censorious young men of little occupation rather than the solemn and regretful testimony of highminded and venerable “ Fathers in Christ.” We owe the writers no ill-will, they have not injured us at all, and probably their own calmer judgement will whisper to them some deep-toned misgivings that they have erred. Such, we are persuaded will be the conclusion of many who can think seriously and speak honestly upon such questions without any itch to exhibit their thinkings in the newspaper. But we cannot for a moment bow to the principles so imperiously laid down in these letters for the guidance of Christian Ministers. They assume that there is great ini prosperity in the part which they have taken—that it is an exceedingly mischievous thing for them to sign a requisition. They will not we suppose also demand that ministers should at their bidd" ig refrain from tiic use of their franchise. As missionaries they are closely connected witlx the civil condition of the Natives—hut, apart from this, they have not ceased to be citizens when they became ministers. If they have political rights like other men how can they not have also political duties. No man can justly he indifferent whether Rohcspeicre or Wilherforce, [Paine or Ashley he aspiring to the chief rule. But in truth, “ Elector” is, inconsistent with himself, lie would have the ministers teach their congregations their duty in the choice of “ political rulers,” and this as part of “ the council of God,” and yet when they sign a requisition along with many of those whom they may properly enough have advised, “ Elector” writes of this in a newspaper as black, “andstrivinguntoblood 1” The minister may then according to him, do the greater thing of directing a hundred or a thousand persons as to how they should choose, hut when he does the lesser thing of choosing for himself he has “ descended into the arena of strife for a parliamentary representative” and may expect to be well baited with texts of Holy writ, and without them from the pages of the Southern Cross! Elector forgets, too, that supposing his own strictures on Col. Wynyard true, which we do not believe that no requisition implies anything more than that the porso i addressed is comparatively the host man. It would l a interesting to know how “ Elector” purposes to vote. Seeing that lie has availed himself of Mr. Brown’s newspaper, it may he supposed that ho will support that gentleman. Will he then have acted in the spirit of his texts, or will lie not? Nothing can excuse any eager partisanship in Christian Ministers or any unseemly contact with political bustle. But only let it he understood that they he found guilty before they are assailed in the newspapers. The miry ways of electioneering ambition and chicanery do not indeed befit any man who values or professes Christian discipleship, and it were infinitely to be desired that the foot-marks of such might never he found in them. It will also require the utmost vigilance of all parties to keep asunder the ire theological and the ire political; but should that vigilance be baffled-—-the writers of whom we have been speaking will certainly incur the blame of having been the first to bring their intensities mischievously together. One of the assailed Ministers. April 29th, 1853. To Ihc Editor of Ihe New-Zealandeu. Sir, —Having obtained Captain Powditch’s permission to publish the enclosed letter, handed to rae as one of Mr. Bartley’s requisitionists, I heg you will insert it in your next issue.—Yours, etc., J. Williamson. Epsom, April 28th, 1835. My Dear Sir,— You seem surprised at the

public profession of my opinions in Ihe NewZealandeu of 1 Glh April, and ask if I feci myself acting as a parly man, or if (hey be really my deliberate judgments and upon what grounds I justify them. I can neither admit, nor allow you to remain under the impression that 1 was a party man ; I hope 1 never was so; and 1 trust that my present exhibition of the grounds of my opinions w ill satisfy yon thereon. lam no opponent to Mr. Brown as an individual, nor to his character, but to hrs political position, I should he equal! y so to any other gentleman similarly circumstanced ; hut as I have for the first time engaged in supporting my opinion by publicly canvassing the merits of the case, I cannot object to your request to satisfy you, Mr. Brown's political course I certainly disapprove, yet as it is so abundantly shown forth by the various newspaper writers, I shall contine myself (o what 1 consider of more weight; —the consequences of his position and its influence in the country, Mr. Brown has unremittingly turned Ins attention to increase his wealth, and (from my present knowledge) 1 must now say also power, from interior operations in the colony;—and accordingly we find he lias various and extensive landed possessions, Ihe influences derivable through this means has ramified itself through a variety of businesses—which have placed a large body of persons entirely under his control, or at all events as the French say, “hors do combat,” unable to oppose him. Persons engaged in (his extensive country business, must vote for him; others say I rent a farm, i must vole for him ; I deal f< r spirits for my house, I cannot oppose him; I was helped to buy a piece of land, I canni I oppose him ; I have a small mortgage, I canm t oppose him ; I bought a few hales of goods, and it is not convenient to pay, I cannot oppose. But not to multiply cases which must suggest themselves to your own mind, ! shall finish by supposing a case under the new land regulations. Some one wants some particular piece of land, say 200 acres; all that he is able to buy. But a larger claimant puts in for 1000 or JSOO--lhis is all (lie good land in the neighbourhood; (he larger claimant says, friend if you put up, 1 shall bid against you, if you let me buy, I will give you your 200 acres out of it: then of course he must fence, as the larger holder, only grazing his cattle and sheep, destroys the hush run—now when the fit»i year's voting comes (a fearful time for one man’* power to triumph) the grazier says,—friend J am thinking of fencing in, and 1 want to know what (tic half your side line comes to—l suppose you w illgive me your vole, —Now ! S ask if that grazier will he likely (o bring in a hill dial aii large graziers who run stock on the open runs, shad he compelled (o pay their half shares of die fencing done, to Keep his cadle o IT the farmers’ lands. There is no need (o multiply these cases, or perhaps you would think I was filling she cap on particular persons. Certainly 1 do not blame Air, Brown for increasing his wealth and influence in any way suitable to himself; it is to the consequence of one man having so large an influence over the country. But you will say Air. Brown is a good man, and will do his best for (he country ; no doubt Air. Brown intends so, but will he not lake care of his own interests, and if (hey preponderate so much, 1 think he would he a dangerous man, even in (he provincial council. Although ! was not here, 1 have heard a good deal about (he last elections, more than I would he willing to say even to you. But look at (ho fads—there were in the late Council, Mr. Brown and Dr. Campbell, both in one house and policy : limy would not vote against each other , and I .am fold Mr. Farmer—a third party in the same house, hut he failed in consequence of Captain Porter coming expressly to break this coalition : then Dignan was brought (o oppose Mason, because .Mason was not a Brownite. Then there is Mr. Forsailh, who, as hosavs, “ loved Ca'sar much, ’hut he, it appears, has fallen off, as all really independent minds will. Then (here was Mr, C. Clark, whose case Mr. Brown ami Me/oilcos defended, and who was put in by the manoeuvre of Mr. Williams, who, it is said, first started Mr. Bushy, and then left him for Clark. What others there were 1 forget. Now had this been followed out, here are four men at least who, il is supposed, had personal quarrels with Governor Grey ; and if Farmer had got in there would have been one-fourth of (lie members out of one house, and one-half of (he council personal antagonists of Governor Grev. Keally it is too had to make the Councils of the Province the ring for fighting their quarrels with Governor Grey. Now 1 do think Governor Grey fried, by the late election, (lie strength of the Bi own party, and presuming the people’s eyes had been opener! to the fact of that Council being a packed party of one man , under the pretence of opposition to a had Government, had accorded a wider field, in (he hope that, instead of two-thirds, Mr. Brown will not he able to pack more Ilian one-quarter. A close Borough may do very well in England, amongst 000 representatives, (ho power of the Crown, and the aristocracy ; hut in Auckland il would be ruinous. Wc might as well tell Mr. Brown to choose his own Council as lie pleases, for what hope will there he if Air. Brown is the Superintendent; if his packed Council pass any measure inimical to other interests, will any petition from the minority to Mr. Brown as Superintendent not to affirm the hill he of any avail. Now this leads to Ihe consideration that a military officer is the very best person, because he can have no private interests to serve; and should the Council he packed, or contain a largo element of one interest, a petition, hacked by outside support, would induce (he Superintendent to pause before he affirmed (he Bill. It was for these reasons (hat 1 should at all times prefer a military man. If. will he a long time before wc can hope to have in New Zealand men disinterested in the current business of the colony; anddespairingofGoloncl Wynyard taking office, I had fixed my views first on Air. Bartley, and next on Air. Busby, for the same reason that we marry our kings and queens to foreign in preference to native aristocracy, to prevent 100 great an ascendency in any one family interest in the country. I think wc should always look for the aristocratic part of our Government in persons disconnected with local or parly influence. And now you ask why 1 intruded my opinions before the public. i answer shortly —because il was covertly hinted to me that I was one of Air. Brown’s adherents, through all his policy, and that while I was by my opinions betraying his cause in private, 1 would not confess them publicly, and therefore I published them for my own justification, and let every may judge of them as he likes. Now, .Sir, I have written you a very long letter, and I trust said quite enough to justify my r public proceedings and private opinions, and I think I have not here slated anything improper to be said, or any way hurtful to the private feelings of any one. 1 would certainly rather forbear than do so. As for the political thumps 1 or any one else may get through the papers, why, wc must bear them, although I am sorry to sec that no measure adopted to avoid animosities, political or private, can prevent them, and thus we see, as in my own case, the devil always finds some work “ For idle hands to do.” Yours, dear Sir, truly, Wm. Powditcii. To Mr. J. TVu.uamson, Auckland.

Mu, Wm. Brown is prepared to FORGIVE Sir Geokgjb Grey. To the Editor of the New-Zealandek. Srn, —In the “unanswerable” lender of the Cross of Friday hist, Mr. Brown declares “ that the opposition to him, Mr, 8,, a* Superintendent seems to resolve itself into a nutshell’’ viz. “Ilfs antagonism towards Governor Grey, his assumed consequent inability to work harmoniously with his Excellency,” and the great desirability of installing u a Superintendent wlio would cordially co-operate with him.” Without stopping to enquire hy what process “opposition can he resolved into a nutshell,” or whether it might not with equal facility* be resolved into a cabbage or a pumpkin, I suppose Air. Brown’s meaning maybe taken to be that the objections as above stated are of so insignificant a character, that they might be said to lie in a nutshell ; and by way of effectually obviating the difficulty, Mr, Brown a little further on observes “Governor Grey lias exhibited a marked and beneficial modification of his policy* in the removal of the land restrictions—who can tell what greater modification may be still in store V Mr. Brown has now great hopes of Sir George—thinks of course that lie discovers signs of improvement in his naughty pupil, and willing to give him a further trial, cheerfully insinuates that, if the electors insist upon making him, Air. W. 8., Superintendent, he is prepared to forgive all the past and “to conduct his official intercourse with the Governor in a manner creditable to himself, and becoming bis duty to the colony.” Magnanimous Air. Brown ! self-sacrificing Air. Brown I what a pleasant world this would be, if every man who wronged his neighbour was so willing to forgive him, as Mr. Brown. Unfortunately to make a reconciliation perfect both parties must consent to it, and I confess that I have some fears that Sir George Grey might not consider that Mr. Brown’s amiable offer of pardon for his (Sir George’s) past offences, was a sufficient atonement for so many years of calumny and abuse, for so much virulence and misrepresentation. It is just possible that it might occur to him that the gentleman who thus kindly proposes to fraternize and forgive, was the same who had but a month since poured out all the vials of his wrath against him, had declared that he was “ dead to honor and to honesty” “an incubus that ground them, (the colonists) to the dust,” that he had “vowed in baffled rage to cause the grass to grow in the streets of Auckland”—that to enable him to steal “ the capital of New Zealand” lie had burned down tie Government House in which lie resided —that he had witli eager anxiety sought to ‘ rifle, rof), and 'plunder" the people of this province, that ho was an “ Arch-traitor to the colony* unjustly confided to hissway,” &c., &c, ; these are a few of the compliments picked out of one single leading article in the Cross of March 22. Air, Brown is to he sure quite ready in order to get over the objection “of antagonism” which stands in the way of his election as superintendent, to forgive the Governor all these offences ; but is the representative of Her Alajesty in this province, prepared to accept the hand of fellowship which Mr, William Brown condescendingly extends to him, and to co-operate cordially* with him even in public affairs. What kind of correspondence would you, sir, or any individual in this community, lie disposed to hold with a man who had indulged himself week after week for six years, in thus maligning you i There never was a more critical conjuncture in our affairs than this ; united action was never so imperatively* required, but thanks to the vanity and egoism of Mr. Win. Brown,] we start uj on our new career like coupled hounds, and the earliest exercise of our freedom must be signalized by the triumph of a party*. At any other period I confess I should not he sorry to see the attempt to govern this province, made by Mr. Brown, and a “ select” few of the individuals who seem to take the greatest interest in securing his election : but we have not time to prove, by an experiment so dangerous, that which is already so generally* received as true—that Air, Brown and his followers, in the face of such an opposition as lie lias raised against him, could not carry* the business of the province through one single session of the new Council. I confine my*self at present to dealing with what Air. Brown calls his antagonism to the Governor. I defer to another occasion my purpose of discussing the grave objections which exist to placing a gentleman, at the head of public affairs ; who is actively* engaged in mercantile pursuits, to placing the distribution and supervision of the public contracts in the hands of one who is or may become a contractor, to placing the public lands of the Province under the control of one who is a land-jobber, and whose command of capital enables him to become a monopolist, to placing him, in fine, in a situation in which his public duties must necessarily often, if not always, he in “ antagonism” to his private ends. I am hy* no means prepared to say*, sir, that Air. Brown would always or ever prefer his individual interest to the public good ; but it is a leading article of Mr. Brown’s own political creed that in public affairs if wrong is possible it will certainly* be done. The measures of each succeeding Governor, from poor Captain. Hobson, (whose death Air. Brown’s party were proud to boast that they had hastened,) down to Sir George Grey*, have always been submitted to this rule, and Mr. Brown cannot reasonably* object that wo should now* try* him by his own test or calculate the risk of being governed by him, according to the standard which lie has himself set up.—l am, Sir, &c., X. Auckland, April 27,

To the Editor of the New-Zealander.

Sm, —In the Nkw-Zealander of Wednesday last, is a letter from Mr. Williamson, containing the following paragraph : “ 1 was one of the most active of the requisitionista in bringing Mr. Bartley forward, believing him to be possessed of the qualifications for the office set forth in the requisition which 1 signed ; but I certainly should have bad nothing to do with asking Mr. Bartley to take the field at all, had I not been assured, before I signed the requisition, by one who professed to know the minds of both those gentlemen, and who was consulted before any step was taken, that if Mr. Bartley came forward first he would not be opposed by Mr. Brown.” The writer will allow that the paragraph applies to me. Now, the above is a most serious charge. It amounts to this, —that, by asserting what was untrue, I was the cause of Mr. Bartley’s being placed in nomination. It amounts to more than this, —that I was the ultimate cause of bringing a gentleman, of whose intimate friendship I am justly proud, to the false position be has been left in by bis requisitionists. I never did state, that “ if Mr. Bartley came forward first, he would not be opposed by Mr. Brown.” The fact, that such a statement on my part would have been a direct untruth, is proof sufficient, in this community, that I did not make it. But I will, nevertheless, repent what occurred on the occasions referred to. Mr. Williamson says I was consulted. He suggested Mr. Bartley as a fitting person for the office of Superintendent; in which fitness I concurred. lie was then proceeding to enlarge upon the subject, when I interrupted him, telling him at once to avoid misunderstanding, tliat it would be impossible for me to come forward in support of Mr. Bartley, until I should be assured that Mr. Brown would not stand; my intimacy with both being such, that if they were placed in opposition to each other, 1 should be obliged to remain strictly neutral. Mr. Williamson said he thought I was bound to declare for Mr. Bartley. I answered, that “ if Mr. Brown did not come forward I would work night and day for Mr. Bartley” (1 am clear as to the precise words); that it was still doubtful whether Mr. Brown would come forward at all, but that I should wait the issue of bis determination. On two subsequent occasions, when pressed to change my resolve, I declined, and for the same reason. If this was not the reason assigned at the commencement of our first conversation, Mr. Williamson will ho good enough to state what reason I actually did assign . The very fact that I did not at once

promise my roost strenuous endeavours in favour of Mr, Bartley is conclusive evidence, to any resident, of my bavin g contemplated the possibility of Mr, Brown’s opposition, £&2f tire words attributed by Mr, Williamson to rao bad been used by me, 1 ebonld Imre contradicted myself flatly m the same conversation, and be would Lave ashed me whst I meant. If tbe words attributed to me bad been used, they would bare amounted to thisthat Mr. Bartley bad confided to roe bis determination not to stand if Mr, Erwn came first into the field; and that Wr.Brown Had confided to rno bis like determination if Mr . Bartley cams first info the field ; thus, conferring ot roe, practically, tbe power of choosing between tbe two by getting up an early requisition to either one. Mr. Williamson is too shrewd a roan not lo hare perceived the absurdity. He told me, subsequently, on tbe same day, that it was resolved to confine tbe requisition to such names as could he easily procured ; but that Dr, Bennett bad advised applying for names among the opposite party likewise. I said that Dr, Bennett was right, but offered no further remark, not choosing, lor the time, to interfereMr, Williamson has since modified my “ assurance’’ into an “ opinion,” There is a wide difference between the two; but even for such opinion 1 bad absolutely no grounds. I believe that I did express a wish to some such effect, on account of tbe position in which I should otherwise find myself. 1 am far from accusing Mr. Williamson of wilful misrepresentation. I feel sure that Ire must have been left under the impression that 1 had given such assurance, forgetful of my intimation that I knew nothing. My acquaintance with Mr. Williamson is of long standing, and I have conceived an opinion of him which even the conduct of tbe requisionists to Mr. Bartley can scarcely shake, I believe that he has been misled by advisers, who are experienced enough to have directed him better. But these advisers have enunciated the monstrous proposition, that a candidate may be lawfully deserted by his supporters so soon os, in their opinion, he shall become uulikely to win. I remain, sir, Your obedient servant, Hugh Cauleton. Auckland, 28th April, 1853.

To the Editor of the New-Zealandeh. Sir, —ln a letter put into ray hands this day, by Mr. Carleton, that gentleman denies having stated “ that if Mr. Bartley came forward first, he would not be opposed by Mr. Brown.” 1 can only say that the words used by Mr. Carleton at two interviews I had with him were so unmistakeably plain, in reply to a question or two of mine, that I felt fully assured that if Mr. Bartley did come forward first, he would not be opposed, at least by Mr. Brown, and in this assurance the requisition was at once set on foot, so that if Mr. Bartley should agree to stand he might be brought promptly into the field. The requisition was accordingly prepared, signed, presented, and replied to on that very night, that this might be accomplished. Several of the townspeople, myself among the number, had for some time back been turning our thoughts to Mr. Bartley for the office of Superintendent, because, among other reasons, we thought he was the most likely man, if he were to become a candidate, to save us from a contest of parties—but we were unwilling to bring him forward if there was any likelihood of unpleasant opposition. It was thought Mr. Brown’s party contemplated bringing forward a man of their own, and several were named, but there was no certainty as to their intentions, I believed Mr. Carleton as likely as any to be aware of the state of the case, and took an opportunity of asking him if he knew anything of Mr. Brown’s intentions respecting the office. Now I have the fullest recollection of what passed between us. He was kind enough to tell me that, in a letter received by him at Wellington from Mr. Brown, he stated that he would not come forward himself for the office, unless it were to oppose some u improper man.” (Mr. Carleton has since permitted me to mention the letter, but says that these were not the exact words he quoted). I asked him if he thought Mr. Bartley would be considered an improper man ; when he said, surely not, Mr. Bartley would be a very proper man. Mr. C. then left hurriedly, as he had an engagement. This was on Tuesday, and on the strength of this information a requisition was partly prepared, but was not completed until further information could bo gained. I saw Mr. Carleton again in tbe evening, and purposely invited him in to make further enquiry, when he stated that he had heard nothing from Mr. Brown on the subject since he came to Auckland ; that if Mr. Brown and Mr. Bartley were to be opposition Candidates be would be in an awkward position both being bis friends—but he believed if one of them were up ho would be safe from such an unpleasant predicament, for whichever of them came forward first would not be opposed by the other. I then read to him as much of the requisition to Mr. Bartley as was prepared, stating that Dr. Bennett had advised me to get it signed by some of Mr. Brown’s party. Mr. Carleton thought the Dr. was right, but, when I told him J did not feel sure if it came to their knowledge that wo were getting up a requisition, that they would not bring out another at tbe same time, and that, I believed, the best way to avoid opposition, was to bring Mr. Bartley into the field forthwith, —he offered no objection. I had subsequent conversations with Mr. Carleton. on the subject, in which the remarks were made which he quotes in his letter, and which he must have confounded with what past at our first interviews. I did not ask Mr. Carleton to do anything on behalf of Mr, Bartley at our first interviews, because then I did not know myself whether he would or would not agree to be put in nomination, —we merely wished to get a few names to the requisition with as little noise and delay as possible. It was not until after Mr. Bartley was publicly announced as a candidate that Mr. Carleton’s aid was invited, when he stated that it would be impossible for him to come forward in support of Mr. Bartley, as be was then in doubt as to whether Mr. Brown had not a notion to stand ; —when 1 stated my opinion that, all things considered, the first in the field was entitled to the benefit [of whatever influence he could exert. I do not wish Mr. Carleton, or any one else, to imagine that I have been misled or ill-advised in whatever steps 1 have taken in conjunction with Mr. Bartley’s requisitionists. They were not disposed to place Mr. Bartley in a false position ; in good faith they invited him to stand for the office which they hoped to see him occupy—nor was there any desertion of him on their part, hut an anxious desire to save him from the unpleasantness of a contest in which, —under the circumstances, brought about, not by Mr. Bartley’s supporters but by Mr. Brown and his friends, —there could be so little chance of success.—Your’s, Stc., J. Wiluauson. Auckland, April 29, 1053.