The Pukekohe and Waiuku Times PUBLISHED TUESDAYS AND FRIDAYS FRIDAY, OCTOBER 11, 1912. THAT "REPROOF VALIANT."

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 1, Issue 34, 11 October 1912, Page 2

The Pukekohe and Waiuku Times PUBLISHED TUESDAYS AND FRIDAYS FRIDAY, OCTOBER 11, 1912.

THAT "REPROOF VALIANT."

" lIV nothing i .itninati', nor set duirn aught in malice

Sim k we published Mr Glass's "reproof viiliaut" some now aspects of tlio ijuestion at issue between Mr Glass and Mr Wily have boon presented to us. In referring again to this mattor the view wo take is tliut a paper's moral responsibility doos not end in publishing an accusation of false statement when other information is produced to show that the accusation was wrongfully made. '1 ho present disagreement, it will be remembered, arose out of a letter from Mr Glass (published September 11) in which he said: "Tlio Hon. Mr Massey promised to see the Bill through, but failed to appear." To this Mr Wily replied (Timkm, September 2. r >): "Mr Glass might have added tlio reason why Mr Massey failed to appear. On the morning before tho Bill was to come up before the Committee I met Mr Glass in the lobby of the House and he suggested to me that wo should relieve Mr Massey of any responsibility in the matter. He gavo his reasons, which were excellent ones, and I cheerfully concurred with him. Had it not been for this there is no doubt that tin.' l'rime Minister, who is at least no promise breaker, would have attended the meeting of the Committee." To this came Mr Glass's rejoinder : " Mr Wilj's statement is absolutely fa be and without foundation." This denial breoines surprising when we remember that Mr Glass has all along been anxious to relievo Mr Mas-

soy from a difficult position. In a communication to us sent for publication, Mr Glass says : "As one of the lion. Mr Miissey's strongest friends and supporters I have done my utmost to keep bis name from appearing in the dispute between the Aka Aka Objectors' Association and the Board." That attitude did Mr Glass credit and it quite coincides with the attitude which Mr Wily says that Mr Glass adopted in Wellington. At the last meeting of the Waikuto River Board, too, Mr Glass paid " he was satisfied that Mr Massey was acting straightforwardly and honestly. But to clinch the matter, as it wore, the Editor was on Tuesday called upon by Mr G. Hull, Chairman of the Aka Aka Drainage Board, who was one of the delegates to Wellington to move amendments to the Board's Eiver Bill. Mr Hull t-aid lie had quite a lively recollection of Mr Glass saying that he wished tint Mr Massey would not be brought into the matter. Mr Glass said he understood Mr Massey's position and thought it would be much bettor for him (tlio Prime Minister) to have nothing to do with the question. " This statement," added Mr null, " was made by Mr Glass when thoso opposed to the Bill wero waiting to meet the Local Bills Committee." In view of the fact that we printed the •' reproof valiant," we cannot do less than publish Mr Hull's corroboration of Mr Wily's statement. And seeing that Mr Wily's statement was quite consistent with Mr Glass's own avowal we can only suppose that the agreement arrived at in Wellington —to keep Mr Massey out of the disputo had escaped Mr Glass's memory.