Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

A REJOINDER.

SIR. — One miglit infer from j “Pioneer’s” letter appearing in your issue of rho 13th that I am advocatjug the policy pursued by the present Government. I think, however, that ou second thoughts he will see that this is not the case, otherwise I " would not ha advocating a union of forces to oppose Mr Remington, hut would be a supporter of that gentle- . man. I may say I have no sympathy with the socialistic foolery indulged' in hy the present Government, ; neither am I blind to the fact that they are responsible for the passing of many useful measures. Much that ‘‘Pioneer” says about the Con- - servative party may he true. I be- - lieve them for the most part to be reliable, but their methods remind me very much of that story told of an old” country farmer who was in the habit from time to time of taking a bushel of wheat to the mill for gristing, and to compass this had a stone the same weightjas the wheat which he put upon one side of the horse and the wheat upon the other. As the story runs the farmer at one time engaged a somewhat progressive man who discarded the'stone, halved the wheat and threw it across the horse. Ou seeing this the farmer immediately said.“ Young man that will not do, do as your father’s did.” To my mind the main question is, can wo return one of such conservative views as “Pioneer” advocates? I believe W 6 can’t, and’ the question then is what is the best thing to be done. It seems tome we should bring out the strongest man we can get who will be amenable to both Opposition and Prohibition parties, and thus take the only chance left to us. This lam aware is not a course readily adopted by a Conservative Party, but past experience should have taught them a lesson. A few years ago when the . Prohibitionists did not approve of the Opposition candidate in a neighbouring electorate they, in true progressive style, sent a man to confer with the then political association sitting at Marton, with a view to uniting their forces. On reaching the door he was assailed firstly hy the fumes of whisky, and secondly well anyhow the forces were not combined, and each party ran a man on its own account, with the result that the Government man won, and that, Sir, is what I believe will be the case in'Rangitikei, unless some such course as I have suggested be taken.—lam, etc., FARMER. March 14th.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/RAMA19080316.2.17.2

Bibliographic details

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXIII, Issue 9096, 16 March 1908, Page 4

Word Count
431

A REJOINDER. Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXIII, Issue 9096, 16 March 1908, Page 4

A REJOINDER. Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXIII, Issue 9096, 16 March 1908, Page 4

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert