CRAZY COMPETITION.

Taranaki Daily News, 19 September 1922, Page 7

CRAZY COMPETITION.

(To the Editor.) Sir, —Though I am not a celebrated scribe or public man like Mr. W. R. Wright, or again given tp making a noise over trifles, and particularly trifles which are not my concern, I am compelled by so<jne unseen force to reply to Mr. Wright’s charming essay In your issue of the 11th inst. According to Mr. Wright’s brilliant effort, his sense of civic dignity has been severely outraged by my indecorous use of his great name. It may be true that tn the past less enlightened critics have profaned his illustrious name, but now we live in different times, and all such criticism of "us public men” must bo “scotched.” To come to tin-tacks, only noodles or lunatics would attempt to deny the Influence of this great man in this fair country of ours, and any effort to prove the absence of this “influence” would be superfluous. To the doubting ones let me suggest a survey of this great man’s efforts in the direction of disrupting the county. Has he succeeded? Have the ratepayers any faith in him? Public favor for public men is indeed fickle, for in spite of Mr. Wright’s alleged endeavor to> “do the fair thing all the time,” his influence to-day in the Egmont County is not worth a tin of fish, not the good Norweigan brand, but the Japanese rubbish. The history of Mr. Wright’s little flutter on the Egmont County Council is too well known to need repeating by me. Suffice to say that he has no more hope of ever becoming chairman again than he has of flying. However, for him to say he resigned to save his good name is putting it mildly. He got his resignation in the spot where the comedian in the “Maid of the Mountains” said the fine would he lightest. And he can never come back. Mr. Wright’s

public efforts to convince others of his eminence makes me smile, and feel deeply grateful for the tolerance he shows in allowing such riffraff as me to live. I do not allude to myself as a "unental defective,” because

such terms are offensive. Of course, everyone must uphold his dignity at all times, even when letter writing in the Press. I admit there must be some greater than others in order to preserve the balance of the universe, but for those who out of their own mouths claim a. greatness they do not possess, is unmitigated presumption and egotism. Mr. Wright in his letter has shown his stupidity in holding himself up as tlie ".Salt of the Earth” and the guiding hand of destiny. In trying to create an impression of greatness ("as public men”) he merely makes a laughing stock of himself to people with brains. It certainly was rather unkind of Mr. Wright to stigmatise myself and "the other Opunake mud slinger” as "mental defectives,” but still it did not do us any harm, and no doubt relieved His Greatness. Since, however, I have an idea of the identity of the gentleman he refers to as “the other Opunake mud slinger,” I would just like to inform Mr. Wright that a gentleman he once called a “mud slinger” was, and still is, one of the most respected and esteemed members of this community. Young and old regard hirni as an honorable man and regard it as a privilege to share his friendship. However, this gentleman now, as previously, needs no assistance from me • in upholding his good name. In the battle of brains Mr. Wright was as a child in bls hands. He towered over Mr. Wright, not as a mental defective, but as a mental giant. And now to the subject matter of the argument. I simpy relent: Does* not this competition ensure a. better service for the travelling public? Will Mr. Wright answer this question, and in doing so will he be as gentlemany as it is possible for him to be In his choice of the language? Abuse, denunciation and assertion of self greatness is not argument. With many thanks in advance for wasting space on such a trivial matter.—I am, “THE LAST ’BUS.” Opunake, September 11.