Compiled by Cameron McCullough
THAT “the pen is mightier than the sword,” is an acknowledged truism. Strong drink, so saith the Scriptures, stingeth like an adder of the “deaf” species, but when a powerful public organ, with a firmly established reputation, which rightful status belongs to “The Standard,” refuses to be “gagged,” and in the interests of the community deems it propitious to speak straight out from the shoulder, its trenchant and logical criticism, apparently, biteth after the manner of a serpent.
In last Wednesday’s issue, and with a decreed sense of public duty, we published quite an extraordinary letter under the signature of Mr. Harold A. Prider, a portion of which stated:
“It his been suggested to me by prominent townsmen, including two-thirds of the Shire Council, that I should approach you regarding the possibility of putting out an edition of the “Post” for Frankston.
Such a paper is badly needed here. “The Standard” is not popular, and the “News,” for reasons connected with the firm controlling it, does not fill the bill, although there is a wonderful opportunity, as I know from personal experience, presenting itself at the present time.
It would not be necessary for you to have a man stationed at Frankston all the time. If, for instance, you employed me, I could attend to same and work as a compositor and reporter at Mornington as well. I have a live person who will take orders and gather news for me at such times as I should not be here.
If you would consider this matter, I can arrange for the “News” to cease publication and secure the transfer of all advts’ to the “Post,” in addition to securing others.
I do a fair amount of job printing, but could get more were it not for this fact – with the “News” every penny goes away from the Peninsula. And most important of all, I can secure for you the official organship and printing of the Shire Council, which is a considerable item, running into £300 to £400 per year for printing and advertising.
I have 10 out of 15 councillors on my side to put this through, at the January meeting, if it is desired.”
It was a foregone conclusion that at last Monday night’s special meeting of the Council something would happen, and, incidentally, it may be mentioned that the inevitable transpired. In brief, a further communication from Mr. Prider, this time being addressed to the president of the Shire and councillors, was responsible for creating a lively discussion. Moreover, a perusal of the controversy that ensued, as the outcome of recent events should convince the ratepayers, and all other interested parties how extremely plausible and illogical are the explanations offered by Mr. Prider, also it will be obvious that the assertions contained in the “amazing” letter have not been refuted by him.
At the present juncture we shall leave our many subscribers to base their own opinions on the following communication:
“To the President and Councillors of the Shire of Frankston and Hastings.
Gentlemen,In reference to the letter appearing over my signature in “The Standard” of Wednesday last, in which certain statements, regarding the gentlemen of the Council and the Shire’s printing and advertising, I wish to convey to you one or two facts in regard to same.
The letter, as you are aware, was a “strictly confidential” one, addressed to Mrs. Grantley, the proprietress of the “Mornington Post,” who, evidently, handed the same over to “The Standard” for publication.
The principle is, of course, quite wrong, and I consider is beyond ANY DECENT PERSON’S CONTEMPT. I claim that it was published to injure me personally, and through me, bring the Council into contempt.
I wish to make it perfectly clear that I had no thought of expressing the meaning put into my letter by “The Standard.” I merely wish to express belief that a majority of the councillors would naturally, as BUSINESS MEN, BE IMPELLED TO MAKE USE OF AN HONEST, NON-PARTY PAPER, such as I had in view, rather than an ULTRA-PARTISAN PAPER such as “The Standard.”
I merely used certain figures of speech, and for their own purpose “The Standard” has put a wrong construction on it.
I would like the Council to know that I asked Mrs. Grantley first whether she would sell the “Mornington Post” to me. I was acting for my brother, Mr. W. H. Prider, of Bendigo. In the whole of my dealings with Mrs. Grantley, I was acting solely for my brother, and not a soul in Frankston, nor a councillor knew any thing of it. My negotiations, on behalf of my brother, having failed, both for the purchase of the “Mornington Post” and my offer to co-operate with Mrs. Grantley to bring out a paper for Frankston, I approached a body of Peninsula residents who were making tentative arrangements to provide the district with a RELIABLE PAPER, and offered my services to them.
At a meeting on December 16, I was appointed managing editor of the prospective “Peninsula Gazette.”
I wish to definitely state that neither was, nor has any connection between my brother’s business with Mrs. Grantley, and further, that the promoter of the “Peninsula Gazette” had no knowledge of my private dealings with Mrs. Grantley.
Gentlemen, I thank you.
Yours faithfully,
(Sgd.) HAROLD A. PRIDER”
As the assistant secretary (Miss McNeil) concluded reading the foregoing communication, Cr. Brown rose from his chair, and said: “I saw that ‘Confidential Letter’ in ‘The Standard’ myself.
“Of course,” added Seaford’s representative, “Mr. Prider expresses his opinion there; they are only his opinions. I think we might receive his letter, and treat the other matter with contempt. I think it would be our safest plan.
Cr. McCulloch: I might state I had a ratepayer who came to me over the letter which appeared in “The Standard,” and some force was used in arguing over the matter. But I settled him. At the time, I never knew the letter was in existence, and had not read the paper. The paper was a day late in being published last week. The paper was at my place, but I hadn’t seen it. I was questioned about something I knew nothing about. I am glad that another letter has come along explaining that other one. “Certain people,” asserted this councillor, “would never believe that some of the councillors were not doing anything wrong. Certainly, I pointed out that I had not been connected with anything wrong or had done anything to be ashamed of.
Cr. Oates: Hear, hear.
Cr. Pratt: But the statements in the first letter are not denied.
Cr. McCulloch (heatedly) Do you mean to infer anything against me, because if you do…
Cr. Pratt (calmly): Certainly not!
Cr. Oates: Be careful.
Cr. McCulloch: I, for one, am quite willing to sign an affidavit to the effect that I had no connection with the matter, or never been spoken to in connection with the “Peninsula Post,” or the matter of an official organ.
Cr. Oates: Hear, hear ! Same here !!
Cr. Pratt (returning to the attack): I said that Mr. Prider didn’t deny the statements in the letter which was published under his signature in “The Standard.” He stated that ten councillors out of fifteen were on his side.”
Cr. McCulloch: That statement is ridiculous. It’s merely put a stigma on ten councillors.
Cr. Miles: It falls on ten shoulders, and we can bear it all.
Cr. Oates: It shows that there’s a paper here that is prepared to get below the gutter.
Cr. H. E. Unthank: It’s their own funeral.
Cr. Joseph Unthank: Yes; they’ll go under.
This concluded the discussion.
It was resolved that Mr. R. A. Prider’s letter be received.
From the pages of the Frankston and Somerville Standard, 17 & 23 Dec 1924
