NEW ZEALAND SPECTATOR AND Cook's Strait Guardian. SATURDAY, JANUARY 21, 1854

New Zealand Spectator and Cook's Strait Guardian, Volume IX, Issue 884, 21 January 1854, Page 3

NEW ZEALAND SPECTATOR AND Cook's Strait Guardian. SATURDAY, JANUARY 21, 1854

The Report of the Proceeding of Coun r . cil have been continued to Thursday in our present number. - The Provincial Secretary made a short statement yestei*-' day of the business to be brought on : by Government, -when he informed the. Council it was not his intention' to introduce this session bills, for increasing the number of members, or for giving -power. ' to the Superintendent to dissolve the Council.

We observe in Wednesday's Independent, that the Editor of that paper, and a correspondent of his under the signature of "Minos," assert the Spectator to be " Mr.' Wakefield's organ," that "he is Editor of the' Spectator " with much' more to the same f purpose. -'Of course \vp cannot help ' any falsehoods ' the Independent may choose' to circulate about' the Spectator, nor. can. we suppose' that anyone [will 5 pay, them the slightest attention ;— it is 'sufficient firr us to give tliem : a brief and, contemptuous, denial. '/ -'* ' |J

The Salopian arrived on Thursday from' Hawke's 'Bay. 'She spoke on Saturday the 'American whaler Mary Gardiner, of New York, 1 off Cape :f: f uniagain, with 1 50 barrels sperm oil; out 14 rnonths,. : and"intending to' cruise till filled up.' The' Whaling station at the bottom of Hawke's Bay captured in tiae Christmas week 30 sperm whales, the value' of which may be roughly estimated at £9,000. - '

Wb have received papers from Nelson, -Lyttelton and Otago, but they contain no local intel" ligence ; of- interest. -The" Sittings' of'- * the* Otago Council'commenc'ed on the 30th Tilt, bufe no report of its proceedings is given ' in the Witness', ' ' - ' * ' • •

20fh Jamn^^^^^^H " Minos'—^B^^^^^rein "the Infernal Regj^^^^^^^| 1 - <7Hc.'-7T7^PMK, - <> i^^^^^^H "Faqin-'"— Abad cJinwFatw in Olirer Twist- ~>^^^^^^^H Sir,— l notice a letter in last Wed "i^BJMH peMeni, signed "Minos." He cousim^that Tflp letter to you of the J4th instant, sigttt?fl^r.<ii bears ■internal and* indisputable evidence of liSing been .written by Mr. Wakeficld. However flattered, I feel at having my production, which was hVtrriedly writtfn over the breakfast table, considered as the "production of so talented a writer as' Mr. E G. yet I cannot, in jnstice to that gentleman.allowahe public to remain one moment undei ,tha.t impression, especia^y, as I am accused, by t Minos of falsehood"; and I therefore take the earliest V>np6rtui»ity of publicly stating that Mr. E.G. "Wakefield had no more to do' with my letter, signed A., thaml luulwith the letter signed Minos — and, further, that I have not had any communication with Mr. .Wakefield for some week's. Who lam is a matter of no momer.t. I am, simple A. Mr. Wakefield and I are not quite so closely allied a* Minos and the Provinciad Secretary, Mr Fitzherbert. lam no partizan of Mr. Wakefield !'s, allho', .as far as that gentleman has conducted himself in ,the Council, I see nothing whatever to' complain of in -him; and it x.-ould be well that the Provincial Secretary and his learned colleague were •to.conduct themselves after the same fashion, and not allow their pride and temper to override their discretion. Let each of these gentlemen take a few lessons-in political demeanour from Mr. Wakefield, 'and they will find themselves none the worse.'* '" ' " Minos" does not in his letter attempt to shew that my charges against the Secretary, Mr. Fitzherbert, and his colleague, Mr. Brandon, are untrue : it would take him a vast deal of trouble to do so.!- I think sufficient evidence is contained in my letter to you of the 14th instant to substantiate such charges, but Minos says there is not one single word for or against the principle of the two great measures discussed during the week. No. I did not allude to those measures, because I considered they had nothing to do with my charge of incapacity against the two Executive officers, the Secretary, and his colleague. . , - , "Minos" charges me with uttering a falsehood, 1 with 1 tKe full consciousness that what I uttered was ' false*,* when I stated that the Secretary moved that ■ there be an evening sicting, and that he and his 1 colleague , were both absent therefrom, and that the consequence was there was no House. Minos might have 'ascertained from the best authority, as I have done, that what I stated was true, and moreover I assert, it as true, that had Mr. Fitzherbert and his colleague wished a House that evening they could have had one : but Mr. Fitzherbert was too tired, after his two days 1 journey to Rangitikei and back, to wait and sit >n the Council for two or three hours and return to'tlie Hutt. Let Minos ask those two officials where they were when the Speaker adjou,rned the House on that particular evening. Minos may fancy I do not know what takes place behind the scenes, but he is mistaken, and he need be Very careful what assertions he sets forth , Minos. states that Mr. Fitzherbert was absent two days only— but what will, the public think of the veracity of Minos, when I state that Mr. Fitzherbert started on the Friday (during the lunch to the natives)^ and returned to Wellington on the following Thursday. Who instructed the Speaker to adjourn the House from that Friday to the Tuesday following, after it had been proposed by the Secretary himself that they should, owing to the press of business, sit every day ? Was it not done for the Secretary's conve~ ' nience, to enable him to go to Rangitikei ? Minor says, evidence to support sweeping charges ought to be as definite as possible, but that it did not suit my purpose, to give such evidence. I really had no purpose to serve. I stated what I believed to be the acts, leaving the public to judge whether my conclusions therefrom were correct or not. Butif Minos, oc the. Secretary, or his learned colleague, wish for definite charges, 'with sufficient evidence, I can help each one of them to his.heart's content Minos states that the Provincial Secretary did not ask that the' names <jf the absent members should be taken down. I took this from the repoit of the proceedings in the Spectator, but as Minos denied it to be true, I have since made special inqiiiry, and I find that erery reliance can be placed on the'aecnracy of the reports in the Spectator. So much, for Minos' vet acity. Minos states that he has ascertained on the best authority, that there is not one word of truth in the whole of my statement respecting the address to the Superintendent, and that it was Mr. Wakefield who suggested the address, and, not Mr. FitzherberL - Why did not Mr. Fitzherbert state this in the Council at the time, and deny Mr. - Wakefield's statement? As he did not do so, there can be but one conclusion, that Minos has been misinformed, or misunderstood what had been told him. Ido not wish to charge Minos with uttering a falsehood, with the full consciousness that what he uttered /was false, as he has done with myself; but I will say tliis, that having believpd A. was Mr. Wake-field,-Minos, without regard to circumstances or ,facts,->has allowed his hatred to that gentleman to pervert his veracity. Minos knows full well that Mr. Wakefield is not the editor of the Spectator, but it suits his vindictive j mind 'to say so haphazard, just En the 'same way as ;th.e Independent has stated Sir George- Grey, Mr. Domett, and others, from time to time, to be the editor. So much for Minos' veracity, and for his mendacity. If he wishes to avoid meeting with his Namesake, he had better cease to write, unless he can' learn to speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth: and I would beg him to remember, that facilis descensus Averni, which may be translated, it is a very easy descent to the infernal region's. Minos has not answered, and J .defy him to contradict the charges of incapacity for office made by me agairfst the Provincial Secretary Mr. Fitzherbert, and his colleague Mr. Brandon. I- said in my letter in your paper of the 14th instant, signed A., that the charges of certain writers in your columns, of incapacity these two gentlemen, were fully borne out, and " are being borne out by the proceedings now before the Provincial Council. 1 ' Was I correct in this assertion or not ? When I wrote this I was not aware of what had taken place in the Council on the Fridays being the very 1 morning T wrote such letter. Can Minos deny that the in the Council on that day are sufficient evidence of my charge of incapacity against the Provincial Secretary? Did not the' Provincial Secretary on that very day state in Council that the phraseology of the Contractors' Bill would be altered so as to gipe effect in a more distinct manner to the intentions of Government, but the Government had no desire to take the House by surprise ? And I'have since been informed by some of the members that other bills have been delayed being brought forward, because the Secretary had been in - formed that there was' some ' error or another in such bills. Are not these sufficient proofs of my charge of incapacity against - the learned Solicitor for the' Pro vi nee,; Jkfr. Brandon/ And- did nob that learned official, in his, place in Council, admit that there was a r little error, in one ot the^bills then, before, it, b'ut'that it was of no consequence ? And' did' not Mr. " Wakefield state, in answer, that the-learned gentleman put hinv in mind' of the. young woman who? had a chance > child,,., and who excused herselfjUpon the ground that Jt.was only a very little one ? - And,; Mr. Editor, was there nbt'a roar as well in the'Wdy of the Council as'iri'thegallery on such remark* being niade?' Minos may^from his position, uphold the learned official, in- treating Mr. Wakefield's attacks- as not being , able to injure that official in the public estimation, — but I can assure, •both Minos and that learned'gentlenian,' that Hhe' public have a very different estimation of ) the learned' gentleman than what Minos or he expects, an,d that the /*araed gentleman, as far as h'js abilities are<co.ncerned, cannot hold a much-lower place in the public estimation than he does at present. ' , " With these remarks I leave Minos to hi 3 fate: . T ' i'..But,wMr. Editor/ what can be said of the gross ; falsehood, not actually set forth but implied, in.the. ; leader of the Independent of Wednesday last, wbejn 1 .stating that the gallery of the Council on ' Monday last exhibited a beggarly account of empty benches

R^^t-it was crammed full? The.would~be at the end of such a falsehood ■■[character with Minos himself. What HtibuV think of »m editor ,who can quote re at; the foot of a false statement, when it ? And so can somebody else when his purpose : we are told — i Devil quoted Sciipturo like a very learned dork." his little incident, I believe that Minos himself is the writrr of that leader. He may well exclaim, 0 lempora ! 0 mores! When a public falsehood is set forthwith a scriptural quotation at the end, the exclamation comes with a bad grace from him; it condemns him. '- ' ' In addition to incapacity, I charge the Provincial Secretary with pride and inconsistency. U . Minos will require iufficient evidence. I will giye it. With regard to the Provincial Secretary's prjde 'tis excessive. What inducW'him to talk' of his Parliamentary duties? What induces him, when he, pulls out his watch, to say,- I can't stop any longer,- my Parliamentary duties reall me away? What induces him to talk of the Treasury benches of the TToust'? What induced him to state to the effect that 7ie^ would not resign the Treasury benches as long aTftefyad the < onfidence of the House ? Are not all these tfie^indications'and sufficient evidence of am n%aving run riot with his position? Put a beggar on horseback, and He will ride to the — — . Are not these sufficient midencee- o £ pride. If this do'not satisfy Minos, let him recall the peraottjtl demeanour of the Secretary in the Council. iQan anything be more domineering, more dictatorial, more sneering-, and, more-con-temptuous than .his conduct there? Addison says, " I have seen an eye curse for half an hour together, and an eyebrow cal» a man a scoundrel.," But what has \hc "Secretary said by his demeanour and manner in the Council ? . As to the temper of the Secretary, stuely iMi»os does not require any further evidence than what that official himself gives. The memlieis of tL>6 Council had a right to corryiLnn o> c thejsnperious atid dictatorial manner of thp Spcvei'a.y i n the I louse, but -they did not do so irut 1 obliged by the Secretary using language incompatible with the dignity of" the House, and unbecoming a gehtleman, having personally received no attack. On the 'o&easron I allude- to, did not the whole demeanoiir.oivthe Secretaiy exhibit pride and temper, when lie staled that he treated a civil observation of Mr. Wakefield's, innocent in itself, altho' perhaps made inconsiderately, with "scorn and contempt?" Was not the way in which the Secretary attempted to apologise to the Council alone a sufficient evidence of pride and temper? It wanted at least the ingenuousness of truth and humility. But "can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots?" Can the Provincial Secretary change his character and restrain his temper? Can he keep down his private feelings of animosity, and not allow such feelings to interfere with his public duties ? I am afraid not, if we may judge of his past and present conduct in the Council. His conduct is such, that even his own friends are complaining; and. seine of the members of his own side of the House have been heard to state that they will not allow- themselves' to be dragged through the dirt by Trim.* A pretty significant hint this of their feelings and opinion ! With regard to the inconsistencies of the Provincial Secretary, I must write in my next, if you are not afraid of Minos and his imps. I am, Sir, Your obedient servant, A.