MR. REYNOLDS' MEETING. (To the Editor of the Tuapeka Times.)

Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 141, 20 October 1870, Page 6

MR. REYNOLDS' MEETING. (To the Editor of the Tuapeka Times.)

Sir, — I observed in this week's issue of your paper a few remarks on the above meeting, penned by your Dunedin Correspondent. I presume that he is also the author of the telegraphic report that appeared a day or two after the meeting ; for that reason you may not feel inclined to give publication to any contradictory statement; but I will trust to your own sense of fair play in allowing this letter a place in your columns, One of the sentences m the telegram ran thns : — (C His replies were evasive and full of equivocation." Now, sir, I have not the slightest hesitation iv stating that, with the exception of a few questions asked by one gentleman, Mr. Reynolds' answers were eminently straightforward. The few questions were put, in what appeared to me, and I may say the whole assembly, as was sufficiently testified by their loud and open disapprobation, in a most uncourteous and cross-questioning manner. They had evidently been carefully and cunningly prepared beforehand, and put in the style usually adopted by counsel when endeavouring to break down the evidence of a witness. If they were re yarded by hesitating and careful re plies, it was simply a natural result of too great anxiety on the. part of the replier to speak the truth. lam confident that this was perfectly evident to every impartial mind. Beyond this, Mr. R.s answers to the various questions were in the truest sense given in a straightforward and manly spirit. As to the assertion, that "he was very indifferently received," your correspondent must surely have meant to h ive added the words ' $ by me." He was received warmly, and attentively listened to throughout-.. The feeling of the meeting coqld very easily be distinguished by the indignant and strenuous protests occasionally bursting forth against a few who attempted to upset the proceedings-vthose pests of society, ignorant and frothy demagogues who never raise their voices save to denounce everybody and everything, and create disturbances. Again, as to the " vote of thanks being moved by Mr. Grant in a sarcastic speech," that says but little. Mr. Grant's pecu liar characteristics are fortunately well known to the public, and if he choses to do a gr-aGeful act and then destroy it by bursting into his accustomed l'hapsody of declamation and abuse, why, it is Qnly what everybody expects. What man in New Zealand, or what public movement qf any good, is Mr. Grant in favour of] A difficult enigma to solve. Jn his letter a day or two afterwards in the <f Times," he endeavours to ridicule the conduct of Mr. R. in supporting a Government he does not altogether approve of, In this he is supported by pur small friend, the " Echo," and, J perceive, by your clear-seeing and logical correspondent. Why, now, here is a strage matter. Supposing we are electing two members for Dunedin — A. and B. Ido not agree with many of A.'s views ; but still, I believe him to be honest and sincere. On the other hand, I neither agree with B.s views nor do I believe him to be honest or sincere \ consequently I record my vote in favour of A. Am I, then, to be blamed for inconsistency? This, as I understand it, is exactly Mr. Reynolds' position, and which he very clearly explained ; but is those convinced against their will, ar-e of the same opinion still." Now, sir, I did not take up my pen to defend Mr. R. — thei*e is nothing to defend in his actions, and if there were, he is quite capable of doing so himself — but merely to record my protest against the unfair means used by political opponents of twisting everything said and done to suit their own particular views. I believe Mr. Reynolds to be as. honest and conscientious a man as any who sit in the General Assembly, and had he never taken an active part in any other measures for the public good gave the f ' Ballot " and " Separation," the earnestness of purpose and unflinching perseverance which he has displayed in carrying through the one, and endeavouring to oarry through the other of these bills, entitles him to the respect of every man in the province. Every one has his faults, and Mr. R. has doubtless made his mistakes, like other men — "nemo mortalium omnibus horis $apit " — :bu* he is one of our few members who can look anyone in the face without being afraid of hearing the words, " Yoii h.ave deliberately and wilfully deceived your constituents in order to serve your own private ends." Trusting that, although you may not agree with all I have said, you will be good enough to insert this letter in your next issue, I beg to remain, yours, <fee, R.C.F. Dunedin, 14th October, 1870.