New Zealand Spectator AND COOK’S STRAIT GUARDIAN. Wednesday, May 28, 1851.

New Zealand Spectator and Cook's Strait Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 607, 28 May 1851, Page 2

New Zealand Spectator AND COOK’S STRAIT GUARDIAN. Wednesday, May 28, 1851.

The editor of the Lyttelton Times, in replying to our observations on a late article in that paper on the Legislative Council, seems to have lost that equanimity of temper, and to have altogether laid aside that dispassionate tone of argument by which he ordinarily professes to be guided. We are sorry for this, because the loss of temper is an unfailing indication of a losing cause, and our contemporary might possibly have been more successful in his rejoinder if he had endeavoured to refute our statements and arguments instead of misrepresenting them. He appears to be very indignant at the bare supposition that the Lyttelton Times is under the influence of Mr. Godley, and still more indignant at the idea that Mr. Godley—the salaried Agent of the Canterbury Association—should “perform the duties of Resident Magistrate and Commissioner of Crown lands without any remuneration,” and proclaims this to be news at Canterbury. Be it so ; we hasten to repair our error in attributing greater disinterestedness to Mr. Godley than his advocate allows him to be entitled to, and must suppose that in concentrating in his own person so much “ political power,” in accepting this triad* of offices he did so with the view of qualifying himself to become a political cerberus. Without inquiring what connection there is between Mr. Godley and the Queen of Sheba, whom our contemporary so oddly puts together, in calling him “ a wretch” (for no one else does so) we confess that our contemporary does not “by his vulgarity add to his vigour in writing.”

In alluding to the received opinion that the Lyttelton Times is under Mr. Godley’s influence, which seems so much to have stirred up our contemporary’s bile, we should

remind him that this opinion i s nQ current here and in the other settle but at Canterbury, and is alluded to IT^ 8 ’ of his own correspondents. Seeing ever, that the reputed editor of the TV ° W ' Mr. Godley’s head clerk in the land A ciation, and that the opinions in that SB °' are in accordance with his expressed ments, we think there are stronger for supposing the Times to be Mr. Godl • organ, than our contemporary has * serting the Spectator to be the or gan of Government. e But leaving.these personal questions, th Lyttelton Times asks—“by what author‘d are the Customs collected, and the levied in this Settlement ? Is it by the sent of the commons, or not ? What is ' be done with the money now accumulate in the treasurer’s hands over and above the expenditure necessary for Government ? I. it to be spent in useful jiublic works in this Settlement, or is it to be taken away and spent at Auckland or Nelson ?” and talks about hereditary privileges, and so forth The answer is obvious; the same that established the Canterbury Association and conferred on them so many exclusive privileges and immunities—an authority re. cognized, we presume, by our contemporary —has the right of collecting customsand disposing of the revenue in that settlement as it has in any other dependency of the British Empire. And if there be a surplus revenue at Canterbury, it may probably be set apart towards the repayment of the loan of two thousand pounds advanced by the Government to that settlement on the arrival there of the first body of settlers. We may observe in this expression that feeling of local patriotism which narrows and confines itself to the limits of each settlement, and looks with jealousy and suspicion on all be. yond, which induces the settler of Canter, bury or Nelson to consider himself exclu. sively bound up with his own settlement, instead of regarding himself as a colonist of New Zealand, which prompts the suggestions made by the Times, which occasions the jealousy exhibited by the Exminer at the remission by the Governor of Customs duties on their private stores to the first Canterbury settlers, and the jealousy shownby the Times at the appointment of Mr. Howard of Nelson as Postmaster at Lyttelton. This feeling may partly be caused by the way in which the settlements have been founded, partly by their isolation and the want of regular communication between them. Among the various advantages which will be conferred on the colony by local steam communication, not the least will be the gradual removal of these prejudices by the more intimate connection of the different settlements, and their complete union as one colony. And to such a consummation we hope we are now fast approaching. In referring to Mr. Godley’s acceptance of office, we confess we thought it inconsistent that, while as political agitator in connection with “ certain persons calling themselves a Constitutional Association” in "Wellington he denounced the Government as a despotism; and proclaimed his contempt of nomineeis®, he should accept office, and become a paid, nominee of that Government, nor does any thing advanced by the Times alter our opinion; without seeing any analogy in n® comparisons of our contemporary, we may observe that, while Mr. Godley’s ment shows the liberal policy pursued by Sir George' Grey, while with the Times we utterly disbelieve that the Governor of th»Colony would use his extensive patronage to buy ott political opposition, this i®‘ founded charge has been repeatedly made against Sir George by the party in 1S settlement with which Mr. Godley has idea' tified himself, and whose ranks our conte® porary professes to have joined. After bis disclaimer our contemporary will doubt less receive with suspicion their other asset tions and statements.