PUBLIC CRITICISM AND PRIVATE CHARACTER.

Colonist, Volume IV, Issue 399, 20 August 1861, Page 3

PUBLIC CRITICISM AND PRIVATE CHARACTER.

If a scurrilous and licentious press on the one hand bespeaks a depraved condition of the public taste, on the other a morbid and unhealthy tone of feeling is indicated by a shrinking fiooi wholesome outspoken criticism. Mealy-mouihedness is as much a fault—and a mischievous fault—as coarseness and violence. No pubic man or public journal has ever yet set to work honestly and earnestly to attack abuses without the same cry being raised—"You are doing mischief; you are setting people and classes by the ears; you are attacking private character ; you are setting yourselves up for the only honest men in the world." This is the tone adopted by the "writers of reputation '' in the 'Lyttelton Times' in reference to this journal, and echoed by their friends, and by those who have supported the Government in all its mis-doings, during the past few years. The " writers of reputation" may be silently excused for a little irritation at finding the task they abandoned taken up by other hands. But so far as the public are concerned we desire to repudiate the charge which has been brought against us. We are not aware that one word has ever appeared in these pages which has surpapsed the legitimate bounds of criticism on public affairs. No journal can hope to be of use, unless it deals fearlessly with public wrongs, regardless of any authority by which they may be sanctioned, and unswayed by party ties or private friendships. Criticism becomes licentious only when departing from the arena of public affairs if invades the sanctity of private life; and it becomes scurrilous and contemptible only when it aims, by. the imputation of base motives, and by satire on personal peculiarities, to lower the character of public rce.i. Such writing has hitherto been excluded from the press of Canterbury. There are symptoms of its appearance of late for the first time, not however in the pages of this journal. There may indeed be occasions when it may be necessary for a newspaper to attack even private character. For example, the Times in London has, upon more than one occasion, gone out of its way to expose fraudulent conduct in merchants of high standing, and has received the thanks of the mercantile community for justifying its course in the courts of law. Should it be our lot to have such an unpleasant duty imposed on us, it will not be by inuendo or imputation, but by the clear assertion of facts that the task will be performed.

We are led to make these remarks, because we hear it said that the Press has set the example of attacking Mr. Mooi'house's private character, and that of others besides.

We are not aware of having said one word which could be called even disrespectful to the private character of any man. If we were shown such words we would readily recall and apologise for them. We have stated facts so far as they have come to our knowledge. If our statements were inaccurate, why have we not been corrected ? But no one has disputed, the facts; and no one has said, or can say, that the acts of which we have complained are not such as the public have a rijjht to know, and as we therefore have a right.to criticise.

What we have called attention to is, the mingling up of matters of public and 'private interest in the same transaction, and that we assert is the root and origin of all jobbing, all corruption, and all dishonesty in government. We stated, and it has not been denied, that the Superintendent has speculated in lands whose value mainly depended on the advancement of the Railway ; and that in so doing, he made it his private interest to fulfil his public duty. We beg that we may be believed not to insinuate or suggest anything more than oiu* words plainly mean. If we meant to accuse Mr. Moorhouse of dishonesty, or of sacrificing the public interests to his own, we should say so broadly enough. But we have never said or thought so. We have always given Mr. Moorhouse full credit for honesty of purpose; we entirely believe that he has never looked at the matter. in the light we. are suggesting, and that had he done so he would have abstained from mixing up his public and private interests in this manner. An»i Mr. Moorhousa's iriends are doing him a grievous injury, by being angry with those who call him to order in this matter because they nui.-t know that the thing is wrong, that all the world thinks it wrong, and that it ought to be stopped at. the outset.

There is no one thing regarded with greater jealousy in England than the dabbling of a Minister in the Public

We remember even the private secretary of a minister being dismissed some years ago, on the mere suspicion of having been concerned in speculations on the Stock Exchange, aud being refused a valuable appointment several years afterwards on the old charge being brought up again. Now a minister mi^ht speculate in the fon^s y^hvJ.l mU; slU'.['i';.-?f iujui'}' ;'O tiie[Mb!iC. i:^, L:-^:,;wh\.i by *o -.loin? He would fiuUj^a huiXj-eii i;o ?■■•;- temptation of using his power to influence tho Funds, especially if he found himself in pecuniary difficultiesj public opinion has righteously decided that he must wholly abstain from acts which would tend to subject him to such temptation. Now we wish to apply the same principle he:e. The Superintendent has almost unlimited power to take advantage of the vast expenditure of public money in the Railway and other public works for his own private advantage and that of his friends. The law presents nothing but the most feeble and ineffectual protection to the public purse. Our real protection is in publicity, in a geneial sense en the part of the public of what is right and honorable in public men, and in its confidence that the Superintendent will act in accordance with the public idea; and all we desire is, to point out to his Honor, and that not unkinclly or unfairly, but solely with the view of preventing a permanent practice growing out of a single inadvertence, that the name of the first Magistrate in th's province ought not to be mixed up in any way whatever with private,speculations, the success of which depends on the performance of his public duties. This is a principle so clear and so universally admitted in all honorable communities, that it is difficult to understand how any one can be annoyed at its assertion. But whether any are displeased at it or not, it is one upon the enforcement of which we have no doubt the public will

insist,

Again, we have called attention to the fact that Mr. Moorhouse has allowed months to elapse without taking any means directly or indirectly to repel a charge made against him, not by us, or in the pages of this journal, but one which he ought not to have left uncontradicted for one day. It has been publicly asserted, not by us but in other newspapers, and it is a matter of common conversation which it is absurd to ignore, that whilst Mr. Moorhouse was using the contract with Messrs. Smith and Ksight as an argument to induce the Geniral Government and the General Assembly to assent to the Railway bill, he had been already informed by the agents of those contractors that they were not prepared to fulfil their contracts. Now this is not a party or personal matter at all, if the report were true it would not be more discreditable to Mr. Moorhouse, than to the province. It concerned the whole province that it should be relieved from the imputation of having by its representative practised a discreditable dodge on the other provinces of the colony. Well, then it was in no unfriendly feeling we pointed it out, and called for a denial from Mr, Moorhousc, similar to that which his o-xn sexir-Q of whac was due to himself had drawn from Mr. Bowen. We stated, and repeat, that we did not credit the.rumou", but that, as others did, it ought to be contradicted ; and we expected that that contradiction would have been instantaneous and explicit. Mr. Moorhouse's best friends must be surprised and puzzled at so unaccountable a silence. He can hardly ha guilty of the absurdity of standing on his dignity : we give him c-edit for more sense than that. There is nothing more common in England than to hear a Minister called on to contradict rumors of this kind; and we venture to say no Minister would, whether out of respect to himself or to the public, have allowed one day to elapse without giving in Parliament, or if Parliament were not sitting, then by an authoritative paragraph in the public newspapers, a distinct contradiction to such a repoi t. And are we now to be told that we attack private character when we call attention to these facts ? We are defending a public right.: the public have a right to have this :umor contradicted, and sooner or later they must have it. Mr. Moorhouse's silence can only have the effect of seriously damaging him in the eyes of all his friends and well wishers. One peculiarity of Mr. Moorhouse's government is his apparent dread of publicity. In the case of the lands sold to the Government by members of the Government or Provincial Council tor the Railway, we have not met with any one, who cm give us any real information on the subject; and yet it is a subject of very' considerable importance. When we ask—ls it true that Mr. Oookson has sold his land at Green Hammerton to the Government? no one knows; nor what was the price given ; and yet there is a Special Act which was passed by the first Provincial Council entitled the •Limitation Patronage Ordinance,' which expressly prohibits the Supeiintendentfrom making any contract with, or paying any money to a member of the Provincial Council directly or indirectly. s That is the law of this province: it has been openly violated in the case of Mr. Ward, and the Printing Contract; has it been again violated in the case of Mr. Cookson ? The intention of the law is clear] its object is most important. In so small a House as the Provincial Council, the great danger to be apprehended is the increasing power of the Executive Government. It would be ho new thing, but alas a very old phenomenon, with which all students of history are familiar, to see an assembly nominally elected by the people to guard their purses and their liberties, corrupted and emasculated by the money and influence necsssar')y ■at iliti disposal of the Executive Goyer^menr.; r.cr h it generally through actual bribery or the grosser forms of corruption that the door is first opened; it is raiher through the more insidious and less palpable influences of private interest,

hardly recognised by those who submit to them, that the independence of a popular body is poisoned and destroyed. Most wisely then did the fkst Council pass a law forbidding all dealings whatever between the Superintendent and the members of the Provincial Council. And now, when there is a suspicion ot a grave violation of this law having taken place, we are to be told that we are attacking private character and raising ill blood in the community when we call public attention f,o the error. We know no man more deservedly loved and respected in this community than Mr. Cookson; no one more incapable of an unworthy or ungenerous action. No one, we are quite certain, who, had it been the case of a third person, would more cordially have agreed with the sentiments we have expressed ; nay, we will go so far as to say, no one who will, even in his own case, more readily admit that he has committed an inadvertence in tee matter; that he had forgotten the Limitation of Patronage Ordinance, and that it would have been more satisfactory to himself had he resigned his seat —had his land been publicly appraised, or a vote for the specific value been submitted to the Council. No one could imagine that we intended to convey the idea that Mr. Cookson was influenced by unworthy or interested motives in his support of the railway. If that impression was conveyed we entirely repudiate the intention. But we do say that Mr. Cookson has inadvertently set a bad example, which it would be most dangerous to convert into a precedent; and Mr. Cookson will, we are sure, agree with us that if this is not a fit matter for public criticism then it would be difficult to say what is so. But it is not mainly with Mr, Cookson we have to do. It is to the Superintendent we look for maintaining the law. That is what he is appointed to do and is paid for doing; and tiiat is what he does not do. On the contrary, if a rogue were to be elected Superintendent to-morrow (and in popular elections there is always a chance of such men getting to the top for a time,) such a man would commence his career by following the examples to which we are referring, before he proceeded to graver delinquencies. This is the reason we lay so much stress upon instances not in themselves greatly injurious. It is because they induce habits and practices in Government which lead downwards; they accustom the public mind to look lightly on breaches or evasions of the law; and gradually relax that stern sense of nonor which should fill the public mind, and replace it.by a lower standard by which to judge public men.

Free institutions, it cannot be tco often repeated, bring nothing but misery to communities incapable of working them, and they can never be successfully worked unless there is a lofty standard of public duty to which men may aspire, and by which they are judged.