THE SNAKE IN THE GRASS.

Wairarapa Standard, Volume I, Issue 50, 16 December 1867, Page 3

THE SNAKE IN THE GRASS.

(To the Editor of the ; W.4ittABAPA MebcJjby,) Wairarapa, December 12,1867. SlB, —It is a very common delusion tbat most people labour under that there are no snakes or other venomous reptiles in New Zealand. There xtre at least "two kinds of reptiles to be bccasionally met with in this > j is a venomous viper that will bite any one whi will warm it in his bosom, and the otherisavenomons " snake in the grass," that sneaks and wriggles along, the path with its detestable presence bidden from observation by the grass in which it is hidden from view. These thoughts occtfrred to my mind on having my attention called at a late hour this evening to atrarticle in the :.■ f' Independent." The Btyle, and--the excessive egotism dis-played-in it is so very like some of the articles written by Mr Wakelin, your late Editor, that there.u no bat little room to doubt that poor M'Keusic has permitted himself, to the

cat’s-paw of the proprietor of the new ..journal, to write himself-up andwriteydvi down.In reference to the gross egotism displayed by the writer.when giving of himself in his character of what he a thoroughly competent Wairavapa correspondent," whose letters speak for themselves. I consider quite as disgusting as another production of his pen: lately issued as the prospectus of the new journal Which he “ the thoroughly competent Wairarapa correspondent” basin his letter to that journal stated,‘tobe anxiously looked for in the Wairarapa by every body; and I have no doubt that the present article has been written partly with a view of inducing you to notice his bantling; so as to bring his projected journal prominently before your readers. Well, Sir, I really think that your readers should have an opportunity of reading the article, so that they may be able to compare its malicious and venomous style with other well-known articles where the object was to make a malicious and personal attack. In regard to his denying that the “Independent’ ’ has thrown cold water on the tramway project which “ the thoroughly competent Wairarapa correspondent,” “ whose letters speak for themselves” has been writing in favor of. I would remind that gentleman, that both nimself and the proprietor of the “ Independent” are regular toad-eaters for Dr Featherston, and either of them will at present support or oppose any measure to any extent that may be approved or disapproved of by the Superintendent of Wellington. If proof were wanting it is partly furnished in to-day’s issue of the “ Independent” in the manner that a Wellington merchant has been grossly attacked for expressing his opinion of the policy of Dr Feathers! on. Therefore,; as Dr Featherston is opposed to a railway or tramway to the Wairarapa, because he already blunderingly expended (£4(1,000) forty thousand pouuds of the public money making a road over the Ilimntaka, when a nearer and better one could have been found if it had been looked for; therefore, that being the case, I should fully expect the “ Independent” to throw cold water on the tramway project. Yours, &c., Junius. [Our correspondent is in error in his supposition as to the author of the article he refers to. It was written by its Editor, Mr H. Anderson, whose antecedents in this district our readers are well acquainted with. He is correct so far as refers to its Wairarapa correspondent, and it is strange to relate that the •language Junius makes use of in the first part of his letter is identical with that used two years since in an article defending Dr Featherston from his present correspondent’s attacks in the “ Advertiser” in the case of Williams v. Featherston. As for the “Independent ’ throwing “ cold water” on the railway scheme it was patent to eve r y settler in this district—especially to those who are aware that when information was given to the Editor to be used in writing an article in favor of the scheme, it was placed in one corner of the paper as an advertisement. As for the proprietor of the “ Independent, there is no man in this Province, nay in this colony, for whom we have more personal respect; a more honest, straightforward, and upright man is seldom to be met with—but he has one fault, u. grave one in a journalist; he is too pliant, too easily -made the tool of those who would use him for their own purposes. We give him this advice, now that he is free from opposition, were he .to use his paper in giving information as would tend to populate and advance the progress of the Province, instead of making it a vehicle for personal abuse, which is the forte of its present Editor he would retain the support of all truehearted men. We thank him for his advice, and we hope he will accept ours.— Ed. W.M.]