New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) MONDAY, MARCH 19, 1877.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 4988, 19 March 1877, Page 2

New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) MONDAY, MARCH 19, 1877.

Mia. Travers, the victim, a 3 he alleges, of" misrepresentation," should be careI ful. No one knows better than he that people Bhould, as it were, come into court with clean hands. And yet whilst complaining of "misrepresentation" he is himself guilty of totally- misrepresenting the New Zealand Times We.find him imputing to us an absolute assertion that he countenances the effort i being made by his supporters for election purposes to impute unfair play to Mr. Hutchison in connection with the plans for the Town Hall. Now, we did nothing of the kind: Tt.'would really seem as if Mr. Travers were incapable of reading anything, from a paragraph about,a whale up to' a leading article, without getting a distorted view of the writer's meaning. We asserted, and still assert, that Mr. Travers' supporters are endeavoring in the most cruel manner to injure Mr. Hutchison as a candidate for the representation of the city in Paliament by imputing to him the basest conduct in reference to the Town Hall plans. We pointed out that Mr. Dransfield, who publicly accused the Mayor of such conduct, was a supporter of Mr. Travers, and might bo supposed by some people :to be acting in that gentleman's interests, and that if he were so acting he was doing his best to in j ure his candidate. And on this; in a whirlwind and torrent of passion, Mr. Travkrs abuses us in the most coarse an<r"vulgar, fashion, but, has the good sense to disclaim all idea of countenancing objectionable action on the part of his supporters. Perhaps in this latter course Mr. Travers has learned a lesson from experience. When he unsuccessfully contested the Wellington Country Districts for a seut in the Education Board one of his supporters imputed the most disgraceful conduct to his successful opponent, Mr. Toomath. For doing so the supporter had subsequently to apologise under an action at law. But at the time the imputation was made by his supporter Mr. Travers declined to separate himself from the assertions of his friend.. That is to say, he would neither contradict nor affirm them: Perhaps he may now be alive,to the fact that, injudicious conduct in one direction at least may cost a candidate his election. It is a pity that he has not had practical examples, previously, to prevent him from committing the many other injudicious and foolish' acts, which are

opening the eyes of the electors to the, smallness of mind andr obstinate waywardness that underlies the film of qualifications for public life with which his own pretentiousness and the acclaim of a few. foolish followers have invested him. Mr. Travers, it is now pretty plain, stands nowhere -in the" race as against Mr. Hutchison. That gentleman, in his speech at the Caledonian Hotel on Saturday night, fairly disposed of his opponent. The speech will be found printed in another column, and it effectually exposed the flimsy attempts of Mr. Travers to gain popularity on the " private streets" and other questions. We are glad to notice, too, that Mr. Hutchison takes quite a different view from that of Mr. Travers of the mode in which the representatives of the city should attain for her her due measure of influence in Parliament. She had that due measure last session, and for several previously, thanks to the manner in which Messrß. Pearce and Hunter conducted themselves. Mr. Hutchison recognises this. But for the line of conduct adopted by Messrs. PEARCEand HuNTERMr. Travers would substitute the clamor of a Rees and the perpetual quibbling of a Stout, which would simply intensify the prejudices that too many of the Northern and Southern members entertain against Wellington, and would give color to the groundless accusations of Northern and Southern journals that Wellington wants everything for herself, thereby preventing recognition even of her just claims. Of course, Mr. Travers intended his cry of being clamoroub for Wellington to catch votes, and his appeal might be successful in the case of a few unthinking people. But the majority of the electors are not unthinking, and are well aware that the influence of the Wellington members has been second to none in the House, and that had they attempted to attain it after the fashion of Mr. Travers, Mr. Sheehan, or Mr. Rees, they would have been of as little' use to their constituencies as those gentlemen, and would have been as mischievous to the colony as the same persons would fain have been. Mr. Hutchison on this, as on most questions that have arisen since the present contest began, has taken the sensible and proper view. Indeed, it is not too much to say that by the enunciation of their respectivo views Mr. Hutchison has been steadily establishing his claims to the suffrages of the constituency, and proving that he would make a proper representative, whilst Mr. Travers has been forfeiting all pretensions to support, and has been showing plainly that his election would be a positive disaster | to Wellington.