New Zealand Spectator AND COOK’S STRAIT GUARDIAN. Saturday, May 10, 1851.

New Zealand Spectator and Cook's Strait Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 602, 10 May 1851, Page 2

New Zealand Spectator AND COOK’S STRAIT GUARDIAN. Saturday, May 10, 1851.

It is rather amusing to witness the inconsistencies into which Mr. Godley’s orga 3 the Lyttelton Times has been betrayed. Previously, arrogant and dictatorial in his tone, our contemporary counselled, and by l 5 counsel seemed to command under the p al ° of his displeasure, the settlers of Canterbury not to attend the ensuing sittings of the he gislative Council; if, they were told, they would not forfeit their claim to “ static” 1 ’ independence, wealth, or integrity/’ “ ought not to go to this Council.” But wh e!l the indignant protest of some of the w° r thiest among the Canterbury settlers ha» convinced him that this assumption was llo to be tolerated, instead of roaring like 1 lion he has aggravated his voice to the (J 1111 lity of a sucking dove, and hastens to as sure his readers that after all “he is h man as other men are.” At the tencies of our contemporary v/c are no all surprised, but considering the sou from which he draws his inspiration’ counsels by which he is guided, we v/er® to expect the display of a little more we were hardly prepared to find hi® s 0 . common place. According to Mr. 0

dictum anomince could only be “ the nuppct and obedient servant of the Government,” but his organ is prepared to admit that he may be looked upon “ as the representative of the settlement,” nay even that “ his attendance at the General Council would not necessarily imply his approval of the nominee system.” In discussing the claims of Mr. Deans and Mr. Tancred to be Representatives of that settlement, while admitting their integrity, good sense, and the general respect in which they are held by their fellow colonists, he objects to them chiefly on the ground that they have been longer in the colony than the majority of those they would represent. But so far from being an objection, we should have supposed that this would have been an additional claim in their favour, as their increased colonial experience (particularly in the former case) would add greater weight to their opinions, while the stake that both have in that settlement would ensure on their part a careful attend-

ance to its interests. Our contemporary justifies the course of ; opposition he has adopted towards the Gof vernment, which he admits to be an extreme one, on the plea that the Canterbury settlers did not make the quarrel, and that by such j| a course they would strengthen the hands of K the. opponents of the Government. Heprok coeds on the convenient but false assumption ■ | that those with whom he has connected J himself are the advocates of liberal instituI tions, and that their opponents are the sup- ■| porters of despotism. Butthe question is not, S and never has been, whether Renrpspntntivp g Institutions shall be altogether withheld from • New Zealand, but when they may be inti troduced with safety and advantage. Those |l who approve of the course pursued by Sir II George Grey are satisfied, when they con- • sider the present state of the Colony, the I ability that has marked his Excellency’s j administration of the Government, and the H success with which his measures have ■ been uniformly attended, that their confi--4 dence has been well bestowed, and that delav I I has not been attended with any practical inis convenience, while the extreme course resort- ; ed to by his opponents, their unscrupulous and factious opposition furnishes an additional reason for delay until the European popu- || lation of these Islands shall become more

I numerous. The measures to be brought before the Council, however, admit of no delay; after an interval of eleven years, the land question still remains to be settled, and when we ” consider the numerous and important interests it involves, if the Council assembled only for the adjustment of this one question, it would confer a most material benefit on the Colony ; and those by whose co-opera-tion this good work is accomplished will certainly be more intitled to the lasting respect of their fellow-colonists, then those whose factious opposition would embarrass the Colony and prevent its advancement by postponing indefinitely the settlement of this question.