Untitled

New Zealander, Volume 9, Issue 751, 25 June 1853, Page 2

In fulfilment of the promise in our last number. we this day publish a detailed report of the proceedings at the nomination of candidates for the Supcrintcndency of the Province, which took place in Auckland on Monday. As the only speeches which Mr. Brown’s partisans suffered to be delivered were thoseon their own side, wc have judged it, on the whole, most expedient, and most in the spirit of that willingness to have the contest decided on the real merits of the respective candidates which wc have not only professed but practically manifested, to copy those speeches from the Southern Cross. We could have made some emendations from notes taken by ourselves and others; but as our contemporary has given, to a great extent, what the speakers actually did say, and, probably, exactly what they intended or wished to say, we have preferred letting them appear before our readers precisely in the form judged by tbc Chief of the parly most conducive to his interests. We do not grudge Mr. Brown any advantage that he may fancy he can derive from these obviously ex j)ar(c statements. It will not be

much, —for the electors will be able to judge for themselves what is tine real strength or weakness of a cause, on behalf of which the candidate himself and his chosen advocates could advance no more valid arguments than they will find in these speeches. They will also be able to comprehend the motive which prompted Mr. Brown’s friends to cry down, by uproar, the statements of gentlemen who were competent, and prepared, to present a view of the other side of the question, which would have scattered to the winds the fallacies and misrepresentations by which it was attempted —at once to evade the proofs of Air. Brown’s unfitness for the office of Superintendent —and to disparage the just claims of Col. Wynyard to the confidence and support of the constituency. However, we can afford to be generous in such circumstances as the present, and we, therefore,. let , the speeches appear just as Mr. Brown’s newspaper has published them. The narrative of the procedings, in other respects, is, of course, our own : in that we could not copy the version of the Cross , without lending ourselves to the propagation of statements which we know to be —we will not say unjust and injurious to Col. Wynyard merely, —but grossly and mischievously inaccurate and misleading. We do not find it so easy, however, to fulfil another promise in our last, by commenting at any length on the speeches on .Mr. Brown’s side, unless, indeed, we are to slay over again the already slain, and reproduce confutations of mis-statements which have been repeatedly answered either by ourselves or our correspondents. Nearly the whole of the arguments (if they may, by a stretch of politeness, be so called) which were advanced on Monday by Mr. Brown and his friends, have been met with facts and reasonings so plain, that those who cannot be convinced by what has already been adduced on the subject, are little likely to be convinced by any repetition now of the appeals to truth and common sense, which have been, for some weeks ast, laid before the public. Some remarks we shall offer, notwithstanding. Mr. O’Neill’s harangue we cannot but characterise as a piece of tinselled declamation, which might do well enough as “ mere oratory,” —designed to elicit thcapplauseofthose whose tastes would be gratified by highflown, though absurdly exaggerated, if not utterly unfounded, panegyrics on Air. Brown, and sarcasms on Col. Wynyard, which were not culling only because the speaker lacked the ability to accomplish his intentions. It could exert no influence except on those who were willing to accept Mr. James O’Neill’s opinions as so profoundly sagacious, and his representations as so accurately true, that they would dose their eyes and ears against the judgment and testimony of all who differed from him. But men who enquire and think for themselves will not, for instance, take it on Mr. O’Neill’s word that “to Air. Brown are we indebted for cheap land,” — while the fact lies freshly before them that that great boon has been conferred on the country by Sir George Grey, who lias, for years, been the object of Air. Brown’s bitter enmity and unbridled vituperation; and has been so, mainly because be would not suffer Mr. Brown and his clique to dictate how he should administer the Government of the Colony. Nor will they, al Mr. O’Neill’s bidding, either believe as a fact that “toAir. Brown we are indebted for establishing the first line of packets from England or adopt, as a conclusion, even if the fact were so, that they are, therefore, under an obligation to confer upon him the highest office in the Province. They will not admit the fact, in the teeth of evidence, that other merchants, both individually and in concert, exerted their influence at home to obtain that advantage for Auckland, and that the Bev. Air. Colton was especially active and successful in bringing it to pass. And supposing (which is very likely) that Air. Brown did all be could in the same direction, they will question greatly whether he is entitled to such a mark of public gratitude as he now seeks, just because he strove, with others, to promote an arrangement which would conduce to his own benefit, more, perhaps, than to that of any other individual in Auckland, he being not only an importer, but also himself agent of the line of shipping referred to. Nor will observing and thoughtful men attach greater weight to Air. O’Neill’s attacks on Colonel Wynyard. When abuse is heaped on the Colonel about the expenditure of public money on the unfortunate Wharf, they will ask to he informed what it was in his power to do in the matter, beyond what he actually did—by stopping the works, and forwarding a strong representation on the subject to the Governor-in-Chief, as soon ns ever such a practical proof of the unsoimdness of the erection occurred as would warrant him in taking so decided a step with regard loan undertaking which had been planned anfi entered upon under the orders of his Chief, before he was appointed to the Licut.Governorship Such men will also estimate at its real value the clap-trap about “shutting the very gates of the Government grounds against sick wives and children,” when they remember that, (to say nothing of those gates being thrown widely open once a week that the public may enjoy a promen ade enlivened by the performances of-the band of Colonel Wynyrad’s regiment), the only restriction on the grounds was the requirement of a note o| admission which might be had, without fee or reward, difficulty or delay, by cveryoncwhochoscloaskfor it once for all; and that even that nominal restriction was imposed only to render the grounds more safe and pleasant to the public, by keeping out mischievous and disorderly persons who had previously given annoyance or done injury. But again, when they read Mr. O’Neill’s allegation that the Colonel “dismissed a meritorious Government servant merely because he did not submit to he bayonetted by a private soldier,” they will probably be puzzled to conjecture what this can possibly mean, and inquiry will give them little satisfaction beyond the additional evidence they will obtain as to the recklessness with which Air. Brown’s' partisans trump up stories to advance their ends. The most they will be able to gather from the Cross, or learn from any who have a recollection of the circumstance supposed to

be alluded to, will be ibat several years ago a carler named Benjamin Newell was dismissed from the service of tbe Government, —but certainly not “dismissed by Colonel Wynyard,” for the simple and conclusive reason that tbe Colonel had wo civil authority in the Province at the lime,—Mr. Newell not having been in this country since the Colonel’s appointment to the LieutenantGovernorship. We have dwelt a little on this l/ist point because we did not notice the trumpery story when it appeared in tbe Southern Cross some weeks since; nor should we now, but in order to show how little Mr. O’Neill’s oratorical flourishes in depreciation of Colonel Wynyard are to be depended on. It would trespass 100 much on our space were we to follow him through all his statements, whether in eulogy of the object of his recent admiration, Mr. Brown, or against Col. Wynyard ; but the specimens we have given will suflice, —possibly many readers will think more than suflice —to illustrate the value of the speech of Mr. Brown’s proposer. Of Mr. Boy lan’s speech we have already spoken well,—that is, as compared with Mr. O’Neill’s or Mr. Brown’s; and we have no disposition to retract anything we said of it on Wednesday. It contrasts favourably with the others in its more courteous lone, — in some of its concessions, such as that the New Constitution is “ liberal beyond all precedent,” and that Sir George Grey has “ proved himself the true friend of liberal institutions,” and “ the poor man’s friend,” —and in its freedom from personal attacks on “the rival candidate,” whose “merits” Mr. Boylan declares himself, on the contrary, “as willing as any one amongst the Electors to acknowledge.” But, notwithstanding this, we must say, we find, on a quiet perusal, very little substance in it, in proportion to the space it occupies. It presents a large bulk to the eye, but if you compress it so as to exclude the gas and vapour, wonderfully little of solidity remains behind, and in that little there is a great proportion of residuary dross, with only minute sparklings of anything more valuable. Mr. Boylan deals magnificently in hypotheses: so and so, and so and so, were to happen, then the Commander of the Forces could not adequately discharge the duties of the Supcrintcndency. On this whole train of hypothesis we shall only remark, that if Colonel Wynyard’s military services were required to put down a rebellion (one of Mr. Boylan’s suppositions) he would undoubtedly be found, where every other loyal man would be found, at his own proper post of duly to his Queen :—and if circumstances of any description rendered it impossible for him to perform the duties of the Superintendency, why then, the office might be declared vacant according to the provisions of the Constitution Act, and there would just be a new election, at which Mr. Boylan might have the pleasure of once more proposing or seconding Mr. Brown,—if indeed that gentleman should not, in the meantime, (having “made his pile,” as they say in California,) have left an ungrateful country which only made him rich, but would, not — alas! blind that it was to its own/<onour and welfare , would not— make him Superintendent ! Though we cannot notice here two or three other points in Mr. Boylan’s speech which we think open to criticism, we must say a word on his strictures on a passage in one of our own articles, which will be found quoted in the report in another column. Mr. Boylan docs not state our obvious meaning. We never (as the language of the passage plainly shows) alleged or insinuated that Ml* Brown was supported at the last election only by persons unable to read and write ; still less did we express or entertain a wish to withhold from “ the poor man a political equality with the rich,” or to deny the franchise to “the man who, with a large family, was placed in circumstances too poor to fly to the land of gold, and too proud to be dependent, who brings up his children in honest industry, Ac.” Mr. Boylan should not have imputed to us sentiments which he must know we never advocated or promoted, either in theory or practice. There are many poor men to whom, wo believe, political privileges might be more safely entrusted than to many rich men; and as to “reading and writing,” we also believe that many who have not even that amount of education would exercise the franchise more judiciously and honestly than some who have had far greater educational advantages. But, we assume it as beyond all controversy certain, that, other things being equal, men whose minds arc expanded by education are belter qualified to judge of the nature of political affairs and of the relative fitness of competing candidates for those offices, than men who have not acquired even the rudiments of learning. And we steadfastly maintain our original ground that—“if the franchise were restricted to those who could write legibly and spell correctly their own names and residences,” Mr. Brown would have even less chance than he has of standing well on the poll for the Superinlendency. We arc very far indeed from “aspersing or throwing contempt” on the uneducated electors; manv of them, we are assured, will prove their good sense and correct judgment by voting against Mr. Brown; but we do say that, amongst the presumptive evidences of Mr. Brown’s unfitness for the office into which he is trying to thrust himself, one of a very impressive significance is, that his main strength lies amongst the least educated and least intelligent portion of the constituency. We know this is a very sore point with some of Mr. Brown s friends; but we believe our x iow of it to be both true and important. An examination of the voting papers bv and by will enable any who doubt the fact to ascertain for themselves whether we arc right or wrong in our estimate of the class from which Mr. Brown’s support at the poll will be chiefly derived. W c had not intended to notice Mr. Boylan s attempt to whitewash Mr. Brown from the grave charge of “infidelity,” to which the Southern Cross has unwittingly given a currency and prominence beyond what it might otherwise arrived at; but the remarks published on the subject by Mr. Crown himself yesterday render it necessary

that we should refer to it; and we shall take the two attempts at refutation conjointly. Of Mr. Boylan’s attempt it may be enough to remark that—like the speeches and protests in the Legislative Counci already quoted by Mr. Brown—it leaves the question just where it found it; or rather, it brings home to Mr. Brown a charge of indifferentism and latitudinarianism —a regarding of all rein gions as equally true or equally false*—which is one of the most dangerous, as well as one of the most specious—forms in which the infidelity of our age manifests itself. Mr* Brown himself has published yesterday a. long article on the subject, surcharged, according to the old and well-known custom of his newspaper, with gross personal vilification ; but he.has missed his aim if he supposes that he will make us angry, or turn us aside into more private concerns when we are bent on a steady discussion of a matter of so great and pressing importance as the decision to which the Electors of the Province may come on Thursday next. We shall merely observe that Mr. Brown only practises on the ignorance of his less enlightened or less thoughtful readers when he tries to persuade them that a man, who, uninvited, puts himself forward as a candidate for the highest position to which the people can elevate one of their number, is not legitimately open to a scrutiny which would be utterly indefensible under other circumstances; and that, could Mr. Brown substantiate every accusation he has ever uttered against men of various classes in the community—from tlic charge of arson— advanced, not metaphorically but literally, in the Southern Cross , against the Governor of the colony,—down to his malignant attacks on very humble individuals, it would still leave the question of his fitness for the Superintendency wholly untouched, and a perfectly fair topic of inquiry and discussion. In that question of fitness, there can he no more important element than the belief or unbelief in Revealed Religion, However Mr. Brown may deny our sincerity in stating that we have always approached this matter with reluctance, and adverted to it with as much delicacy as was compatible with a sense of public duly, we can truly declare such to have been our feeling. But, mainly by his own writhing efforts to shake off the imputation, it has been brought into a prominence in which it cannot be blinked. Mr. Brown says he has denied the charge of “ infidelity.” We should unaffectedly rejoice to sec good evidence of his soundness in those articles of our common faith which are received by Christians of all denomination;; but we must ask, when, where, or how, he has done more than offer a vague and general contradiction, which, from the nature of the subject must be wholly unsatisfactory, inasmuch as, while it may mean a great deal, it also matj mean absolutely nothing that would quiet doubts upon ihe most essential points in the inquiry. There are much easier and more intelligible ways of setting the question at result has already been asked —Is there any religious body in Auckland that acknowledges Mr. Brown as a member ? Is there any minister of any church who includes him in the roll of his pastoral charge? Is there any place of worship—Protestant or Roman ■ Catholic—where he is an habitual, or even an occasional attendant ? Why does not Mr. Brown answer such questions as these, seeing that he is so anxious to sot himself right ou the subject? We can assure him there are many electors who, however conscious they may be that their own hearts and lives do not come up to the standard ofscriplural requirements, yet have a sincere and deep reverence for the truth and the worship of Hea: ven,—a reverence which re volts a gainst the idea of choosingas the head of their Province,any man who pours contempt on religion byrefusing to render it, at least, that outward recognition and respect which is implied in a staled bowing of the knee in some assemblage of professing Christians. Can Mr. Brown satisfy such electorson a point, which, lot it be observed, has nothing to do with inquisitorial prying into matters secret between the soul and its Creator, but confines itself strictly to w hat is visible to every eye, and essentially connected with the proprieties and decencies of public conduct in a Christian country? But in order that Mr. Brown may have every opportunity of making his meaning—what it certainly is not now—sufficiently plain to exclude misgivings upon even the most vital points, let us suggest to hint one very simple inquiry—an enquiry which involves no scrutiny into his “ peculiar” views, or even into the reasons which may prevent his uniting himself with any of the numerous, religious congregations in the city. Does he, or docs he not, believe in the Biule, as a revelation from God to man ? Docs he, or does he not, receive the declaration of St. Paul, that “ Au. Scripture is given by in: spimtion of God” taking those words in their plain sense, and as they arc intcrpicted in the standards of the church of England, the church of Scotland, the church of Rome, and all other churches that have authorised Confessions of Christian faith ? Or, to narrow the enquiry still more:—There are electors of the Jewish persuasion in our constituency, who may possibly desire to he satisfied on this point: Does Mr., Brown be* lieve even the Old Testament, with its miracles and its predictions, as well as its. moral precepts, as divinely inspired, and, therefore, infallibly true? The inquiry is one which, we maintain, the electors have a right to make of a man who aspires to stand in the relation to them, their families, and their adopted country, which Mr. Brown now seeks at their hands, just as much as they have a right to enquire into his political principles. At all events, Mr. Brown has conceded the right by his previous statements on the subject; and it only remains to be determined whether he will give some exposition, however limited, of his views, u'hich can be understood , or whether he will continue to mystify the matter by sheltering himself under evasive generalities, to which it is impossible to attach any well-defined meaning. One word more on this subject. Mr. Brown speaks of the“chargeofiufidelity”againsthiin as “ a Wesleyan charge.” Now, however true it may be that Weslcyans generally are anx-

ions ilrat the civil head of the Province should Itc a man who, at least, makes some outward profession of Christianity, Mr. Brown knows, Lwc say emphatically, Mr. Brown well knows—that doubts and misgivings as to his holding the fundamental articles of the Christian faith, arcnol'confined to “Wcsleyans.” Daring as he is in assertion, will he dare to contradict us here? The length to which this article has extended, prevents our more than glancing at Mr. jj,.own’s own speech at the nomination. We just touch two points. J First, vye cannot but strongly condemn the uncalled for and offensive sneer in which Mr. Brown indulged at the expense of the “ex candidate” for the Superintendency, a gentleman whom Mr. Brown certainly should not treat otherwise than with respect. Thorecould he no mistaking the intended application of the passage in which Mr. Brown spoke of the preference of others for a candidate, “who could unite and make himself agreeable to all —some mill: and water personage , without any strong opinions or declared views ofhis own,” <£c. Surely Mr. Brown might have contented himself with the practical evidence he afforded of his opposition to that rreuileinan by himself coming forward when he was already before the electors, and indeed avowedly, because “ another candidate tc as in the field" —without his ungenerous sarcasm against him, now that he no longer stands in the way of his personal aims. Next, wc perhaps should offer a word on Ids attack on the late appointment of llegisler fienend; but our readers will excuse our referring to that subject only with great brevity, at least for the present. Some such arrangement was rendered necessary by the increase of business in the department of the Registrar of Deeds, which had, rendered the work oppressive to the Registrar, and necessitated delays inconvenient to the public. Moreover, the oflice of Registrar-General of Births, Deaths, and Marriages, is one involving duties which—especially in the carrying out of a plan recently forwarded by the Secretary of State—will be very responsible, and, if rightly performed, may prove of much importance in the future of this advancing colony. But we will not be templed to digress here cither from onr present purpose, by entering into any explanation or vindication of that statistical office, (for it is in no sense a political office, or one that trammels in any way the unfettered writing ami speaking of him who holds it.) Our business just now is with Mr. Brown. Could he not have found, in connection with the ostensible editorship of his own newspaper, a Government officer receiving as large a salary from a fund entrusted wholly to Sir George Grey’s disposal, as that which the Registrar-General is to receive, and receiving it for what, comparing both offices, may indeed be called a “ sinecure,” considering the work actually done? But wc refrain from saying all wc might say here. Every reader who knows the whole facts, will be able to form his own opinion of Mr. Brown as a consistent and honest “guardian of the public purse.” But the point which he tried to establish was, that his opposition to u Government abuses” had made enemies for him in this contest. It is very certain, however, that his attacks on this appointment, at all events, could have had no such effect, for the simple reason that it has been only a week or two Gazetted, and the hostility to his pretensions, to which he refers, dales from the first day on which he appeared as a candidate —and, indeed, long before. Extended as this article is. there arc some matters connected with the subject of it which it may be desirable to submit more fully and. connectedly for the consideration of onr readers. But we shall have another opportunity before the polling, and on Wednesday wc shall endeavour towind up seme arrears in the discussion.