The Observer.

Observer, Volume 4, Issue 96, 15 July 1882, Page 274

The Observer.

Saturday, July 15th, 1882. NOTHING LIKE LEATHER. The great event of the season, the Citizens' Ball, was undoubtedly a success in all its main features. The committee as a whole exerted themselves diligently to render the affair thoroughly enjoyable, and a fitting mark of hospitable welcome to the gallant visitors who .were the special guests of the evening. The tout e)ise?nble was brilliant, the decorations tasteful and artistic, and the catering choice and abundant. ISTo one will grudge the ball committee the meod of praise which they have fairly earned. But it would be gross exaggeration to say that the ball realised the expectations of its promoters, or that it was an adequate representation of the citizens of Aiicldand. At the oiitset a -tendency was displayed by a select circle of xulg^v 2>cirvenues, whose notions of good breeding and lon are limited to a ludicrous affectation of arrogance and superiority, to coniiue the ball to their own delectable sot.

The attempt assumed the form of fixing the price of tickets at such a figure as to shut out a large majority of the citizens of Auckland, -whose only ineligibility is that they do not give themselves ridiculous airs above their origin, station, and means, and hold aloof from that little coterie which, in season and oixt, ostentatiously obtrudes itself as the exponent, of the public opinion, and the arbiter of the social proprieties of Auckland. The promptitude and firmness with which the manoeuvre was sat upon by a majority of the committee was creditable to their good taste and common sense. But there is' no doubt that the manifestation had already produced a mischievous impression, and militated against a more truly representative gathering of the citizens. With a population (including the city and suburbs) nearly double that of Wellington, the. attendance was only 370, against- 650 at the seat of Government.

But tlio select coterie of snobocrats must inevitably render themselves conspicuous by some ;. mauvais ton. They are nothing if not caddish. At the ball they drow the line at wholesale tradesmen, and formed themselves into a charm eel "circle in one corner of the room. They constituted - themselves the gens cle condition, and all others the geus da peu. It was one of the most prominent of the former class vrho, in a spirit of caddish impertinence, singled out the editor of this paper as the object of a deliberate and gross insult, which, under' any other circumstances, might have been passed over with the contempt it deserved, coming as it did from a person whose gauclierie and ill-conditioned boorishness are notorious. But the question at issue is one which concerns the dignity and status of the Press, in. which the public itself is interested, and it must therefore be dealt with on public grounds. — 4, .

Early on Thursday morning, the day on which, the ball vras fixed to take place, it came to our ears that Mr E. H. Stevenson, one of the hon. secretaries, had been publicly boasting in Queenstreet of tfye slap he intended to give the ObBEBYBB, by omitting it from the list of imitations, eont

•to the Press of the city. The editor met this intended move by .purchasing tickets for the lady and gentleman who had been selected to report the ball. In the afternoon, when it was civilly pointed out to Mr E. H. Stevenson that an omission had occurred in not forwarding the usual invitations to the Press, he had the cool effrontery to say, with an air of cynical hauteur, that no tickets would be sent, but if the reporters chose to apply at the doors they would be -admitted. Mr Stevenson was given to understand that for ourselves we declined to drag an honourable profession through the mire" by submitting to such an indignity. That the secretary had deliberately singled this paper out as the object of his miserable spite, is proved by' the fact that the customary courtesies were extended to our ■contemporaries.

As to the mere monetary consideration involved, it is a bagatelle. The real question is whether a committee, composed of gentlemen, will permit a deliberate and unprovoked insult to be wilfully perpetrated in their name. The position occupied by the secretary was purely honorary. He had, for the nonce, to discharge ■certain public functions in the name of the committee, in which courtesy, , tact, and discretion, were essential requisites, and on an occasion when mere personal .considerations were wholly, out of place. His private antipathies and animosities were foreign to the business in hand. He had no more right to misuse the power with which the committee had entrusted him by wantonly insulting anyone, than a person placed in any other responsible position of trust has to use the means and influence of his employer to serve his own ends, or wreak his personal spite.

What we have ever done to incur the displeasure of the secretary is the thing that puzzles us most. We have never mentioned his name in these columns, or referred to him in any way. Until he singled us out for his miserable vengeance we were as oblivious of his existence as if he had been a Choctaw Indian. That he is qualified by breeding' and education to snub the Press, no one ■will gainsay when it is borne in mind that he graduated in the courtesies of the beau monde as a second-class clerk in a saddler's shop. This is, after all, only another illustration of the hackneyed proverb " There is nothing like leather."