THE LIBERAL VIEW.

Sun (Christchurch), Volume I, Issue 25, 6 March 1914, Page 8

THE LIBERAL VIEW.

MR RUSSELL'S IDEAS. SPEECH AT PHILLIPSTOWN. It is to be doubted whether many of those who read the "brief advertisement in the newspapers that Mr G. W. Russell, M.P. for Avon, would meet his constituents in the Phfllipstown School realised that the affair was to be a ' great Liberal rally. Numerically, at least, it was the biggest Christchurclr. has seen for many years. A wet night did not prevent perhaps 150 of the public being there. They were faced by Mr Russell himself, supported by Mr G. Witty, M.P., Mr L. M. Isitt, M.P., - Mr T. K. Sidey, M.P. (Dunedin), and Mr H. G. Ell, M.P. There was also in the .front bench Mr J. M'Combs, M.P., but it was clear that he was not of the party. Mr J. H. Taylor took the chair. The member for Avon, he said, had invited them there to hear him give an account of his stewardship, and afterwards his opinion on the political questions and problems of the Dominion. It must be pleasing to Mr Russell to have seen so J many people present, and more especially so many fellow politicians. Mr Russell was received with applause. He thanked all for the way in which he had been received. Having /paid a very honourable and hearty tribute to th« 4 late Mr George Laurenson, the speaker went on to declare that tho last session had been a most important one. Owing to the incapacity of the ; Government and the fact that it was not prepared to proceed it had beeii of record length, only ten days short of ; six months. The present Government - were the greatest lot of mediocrities that had ever been upon the Treasury ■benches. It was alleged by its supporters that the length of "the session was due-to the tactics of the Opposition; but that was hot so. In support of his statement he alleged that on the Address-in-reply 26 Government, 16 Oppositionists, and six Labour and Independents had spoken. On the Financial debate 15 Government, 13 Opposition and six Labour and Inde- ■ pendent men had spoken. THE STONEWALLS. '

There had been three great stonewalls. The first had been upon the passing of supplies for the Department of Internal Affairs, which included the Tourist Department, Mental Hospitals, and the Copk Islands. The Opposition had declared it- would allow the matter to go no ffarther until the reports were produced. Mr Massey had declared that the business should go through. After the great and lengthy struggle, of which they knew, they were put through; but the Opposition had won, for it had affirmed and established the great principle that estimates should not go through until the annual reports tad beßn produced. The second stonewall was also dealt with at considerable length. It arose, Mr Russell declared, through,Mr T. W. Rhodes —"one of the 'rats.' " The Bill over which the trouble came was clearly an attempt by Massey to placate that man. Mr Rhodes's amendment would have transferred to Mr Rhodes and others all the mineral wealth in the land of which the freehold was being granted. It had

come out atferwards, that Mr Rhodes

and his son held 2000 acres of the land { to which the Bill applied. It was alt an example of the iniquity of the Massey Government, BALLOTS. . > He, Mr Russell, had never been enamoured of the second ballot. He had been compelled to fight his last two elections upon it. He preferred the system of a single transferable vote. Tho Government had had an example of how

the second ballot acted in the Grey electorate where its candidate had won the first ballot, but when the second ballot came and the Government candidate was only®faced by one other man, and had to meet the combined forces of liberals and Labour he had been beaten. Mr Massey saw this, and so had retaraed to the old -'first past the post'J system. The Liberals had opposed this, and had made a fight in which they were beaten merely by an autocratic chairman and the application of the guillotine. The Liberals had done all that they could, and no fault could be found with them. When the

Liberals came back to power they would never use the gag; but they would see to it that the power to use it was under due conEfoL Practically th« members of the House and the people had been robbed of the right of majority rule. Theoretically proportional representation would be the ideal system; but our rural districts were too big, and those in them would never sub mit to losing their ratio. The transferable vote would give each man an opportunity to select his man, and a second, and a third. It was rumoured that Mr Massey purposed bringing in proportional representation only; and he would believe that he was capable of that trick even. It would be simply ridiculous to have the , two systems in work at the same time, and it would certainly be opposed by the Liberals.

. THE LEADERLESS MEN. During the dark days of ,his party, Mr Russell said that during 1912-1913 the Liberals had had ho leader, but had been managed by a committee. But on September 5, at the unanimous request of the party, Sir Joseph Ward had assumed control. (Applause.) His recent utterances had shown that he was alive to the needs of the Liberal. Party. "• • • THAT POLICY. ' It had been alleged that, he (Sir •Joseph) had produced flo policy. But .why should he produce a policy so that it might be" stolen by the enemy? He hoped and was assured that when the time came the policy would be forthcoming, and it would be such that the Liberal Party could appreciate it; it should be founded upon principles, and would express them. Opportunism was useless. He believed that the people were ready for a forward policy. (Applause.) For 20 years the Liberal Party had led and the others had followed; and under Sir Joseph Ward h 6 was assured that it would justify all confidence. There had always been two parties, the Liberals and Conservatives, the former striving for the benefit of the community as a whole, the relief of the poor, and the aid of the worker. FOR AULD LANG SYNE. During their 20 years of qffice the Liberals had put up & record for humanitarian, effort and legislation. When they returned to power they would pick up the work where it had been dropped when they went out in July, 1912 ■when they had been put out by turncoats and traitors! .

A Voice: Renegades! The question of poverty and the needs of the people was not acute; but

it would grow. It was the duty of the Liberals to tackle all that made for ill in the social scheme. Mr Russell gave a long list of such things, including poverty, drink, gambling, and the social evil—which should each be met by the full force and power of the State. The Liberals should be judged by what they had done in the past. The Government newspapers said that the Liberal Party was effete. When such a thing was read each should say to himself, "Get thee behind me, Satan''—should refuse to hear the voice of the tempter—should remember that the Liberal Party would produce concrete proposals leading to action. (Laughter.) It was a matter of government of the people by the people and for the people, and it was the right of the ISovernment to use the capital and credit of the State for the defeat of monopoly. FINANCE. In 1911, the Massey Party had got into the House on promises to reduce expenditure. This year it would be tried on charges of false pretences when it again faced the country; it would be found guilty and condemned to everlasting exclusion from the Treasury benches. Quoting Mr Ballance's words, the Reformers were putting the country into a position of servile dependency. THE COMING OF THE COW. Mr Russell reviewed the position of the land. The earth hunger was a very serious matter, and it was a big question as to how the town and suburban people might be put upon the land and made producers. He alleged that aggregation of small holdings was an existing fact. Mr Russell gave all his enthusiasm to dairying. When the time came when the land was suitable the sheep must give way to the dairy, the fruit farmers, and the apiarist. There must be people, not sheep, upon the land.

NO LONGER A LEASEHOLDER. The question of tenure was settled. Twice the leasehold had been established, and twice it had gone down. Mr Rolleston had tried it, the Liberals had tried it; and each time it had failed —failed because as soon as a man had the leasehold ho called for the freehold. Limited freeholds with a definite limitation would be the scheme for the future. Most of the public land had been sold, arid they must look at the private properties. It must be land close to the ports and the railways; settlers must not be sent to the back, but should be given a chance close in. There were three ways—the graduated tax, purchase under the Land Purchase Act, and compulsory sale. GETTING THE LAND.

The graduated tax was more a matter of revenue than of settlement. The purchase had spent its force. The State might well use half a million in cutting up land in blocks' of not greater value than £soo—let the takers spend their cash on stock and implements. Land which was not worked fully should be dealt with by a land board elected Dy the people, and if not worked should be resumed by the State and paid for by debentures at 10 years' carrying interest at 5 per cent. MORE STATE ASSISTANCE.

The Government should subsidise fruit stores, dairying, and poultry depots. He was aft advocate of State socialism, as a means of settling the land; it should increase the number of producers—"put people on God's great gift, the beautiful and fertile land.''

DEFENCE. The speaker dealt in infinite detail with the financial aspect of the existing defence scheme, both naval and military. The idea that New Zealand should have a Bristol-type cruiser was particularly offensive to him. He ridiculed the idea that one such ship could help to protect our trade routes. The proper course would have been to tell the Admiralty that the time had not yet come for this country to take on its defence. The money spent nowr~ about 7/6 per head, was surely enough. The old naval heda, was surely enough. The old naval brigades had done good work, yet this system did not recognise them at all. He would have four torpedo boat destroyers at a cost of £562,000, and four submarines at a cost of £488,000. The cost of their-pur-chase, etc., should be taken off the land defence vote, the land forces being merely the second line. There should be an Admiralty base in Cook Strait, as Auckland was too far away.

THOSE BOYS—'' UNIVERSITALITY." The whole defence system required to be overhauled. He was not satisfied that there was need for a youth to serve eleven years, from 14 to 25. More than once he had tried to get the age reduced to 21.—(Applause.) Also he objected that the compulsion was not universal. More were called than were needed, so some were missed. The of the scheme was its '' universitality." . A Yoice: '' Climbing down.'' After 21 years service should be voluntary, and all who chose should serve until they were 40, when they should be retired to the reserves. These men would make and give stiffening in time of trouble. NATIONAL PROHIBITION.

Referring to the Government's proposals to reduce the majority required for National Prohibition, he said that he knew there were those who believed prohibition to be necessary *on moral, ethical, and religious grounds? but the ■fiscal side and the need of the country had to be considered. He would not discuss the merits. However, as Mr Massey suggested a reduction in the majority required, it was incumbent upon him (Mr Massey) to explain how he would make up the revenue. The hotels, etc., meant £BBO,OOO in Customs and excise, and £50,000 in local revenue. Mr Massey would have to explain that. A ' 'STATE SOCIALIST.''

Still reading fliany details" as to the position, Mr Russell declared he was a "State Socialist" —(Laughter.) Those who laughed were probably not aware what a "State Socialist" was. He referred them to the Fabians and Mr W. P. Reeves. The State owned railways, telegraphs, coalmines, etc. There was no reason why it should not own colliers and ferry steamers, and ironworks —Parapara, Taranaki —oilfields, fish, gojd and silver. This would be opposed to private enterprise. He would not carc. The State could not afford to wait for private enterprise. '' REFORM—PURE AND UNSULLIED."

It was painful, he said, to have to impeach the veracity of two ministers of the Crown. There had been three bad scandals. He then dealt with the Royd Garlick case, the case of the confidential report which the "New Zealand Times" became possessed of relative to the Public Trust Office, and the appointment of a man against whom there were convictions to the Westport Harbour Board. Liberals had been kicked off landboards, and a magistrate put off in Auckland because he had written much in support of the National Association. The policy of "spoils to tiie victors" was in full force.

SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS. Having condemned the introduction of commissioners who reduced the status of a minister to that of a clerk, he alleged that certain increases in the pay of State employees,, many of whom were in Wellington, had been done to assure the return of Messrs Herdman and Fisher/ as their defeat would be a clear expression of disapproval of the Com-, missioners. When the House met he would demand an enquiry into the. whole matter. UPPER HOUSE.

Talk of reform of the Legislative Council was one of the things on which the Government had traded at election time. It was all a hollow sham, as if the Government had been in earnest it would have brought the Bill first before the Lower House. The making of appointments to the Council showed also that the Government was not sincere. The Council in his idea should be a revising and advising body elected by the Lower House. LABOUR.

New Zealand was lucky in that it had had so little Labour trouble.- This was due to the complete labour laws by the Liberals. The great record of the Liberals was one of "the brightest records in its crown of glory." A Voice: Say that again! They had shown they were opposed to strikes and lockouts. All were capable of settlement by proper tribunals. A Voice: Special constables?

The Arbitration Court had exercised legislative powers, and sometimes had not made an award when it should have. The late strike would not have been had the Liberals been in. The Liberals offered to aid the Government. Privately Sir Joseph Ward did all he .could to stop , the trouble. HORRIBLE!

He . (Mr Russell) had received a letted stating that at a meeting held in. Christchurch last week, two ladies from Wellington. had described Sir Joseph and himself as aiders and abettors of I the strike, and had blamed them for a riot on Waterloo Quay. He was sorry anyone should such statements.

A Voice: Oh, horrible!

Both he and Sir Joseph had done all they could to suppress the trouble. The statement had no foundation in fact, and he was very sorry any lady should have made it.

The Government had-been determined to let the strike run on and settle itself. So it lasted weeks instead of days. There was no need for "th 6 huge array of armed force." It had been shown for political purposes, and to effect this year's election. He had no sympathy with the Red Federation. (Laughter.) He believed co-partnership and profitsharing* would show the way out. He approved of a scheme of insurance against unemployment, etc.

FATHERHOOD AND MATERNITY.

It was necessary to encourage fatherhood and maternity, but he was not sure the Australian method of granting £5 bonus was the best. The child might not get it.

A Voice. And the doctor! The State might spend £150,000 on providing nursing and doctors. FINALE. In two years the Reform Government had "killed" .two splendid surpluses—had put in three autoerats, and reduced itself to the state of clerkslaid the Maoris open to be victimised by speculators. The Government had shot its bolt, and realised it was in extremis; "and was. scouring, round the .country like lost spirits seeking yotes." He trusted the people, and was assured they would see to it that the "flag of Liberalism waeved, over his beloved country." Massey had "whipped Labour with cords," and if enabled by a split in the parties of progress, would whip it with scorpions.

HIS OWN IDEAS. In answer to a question, Mr Russell said these were his own ideas. Only Sir Joseph Ward could announce the policy. The Liberals would stand by the Arbitration Act, he told another questioner. Asked as to the inclusion of penalties and the part the Liberals had played, he refused to answer. He would not take away the right to strike, but would render striking unnecessary.

OTHER LIBERALS. Mr T. JL Sidey, M.P. (Dunedin) said he would not review the speech. While the Liberal party had been run by a Committee, the brunt had been borne by Mr Russell. There was no more alert and ready -speaker. Mr Geo. Witty, M.P., declared it had been a splendid speech. He praised the leader of the Liberals. " Mr L. M. Isitt, M.P., at the invitation of Mr Russell, then spoke. He said he believed a crisis had been reached when they would be destroyed if they did not present a combined front to the enemy. He had stood as an Independent. A Voice: And you're not one yet! He had done all he could —(another voice: For yourself.)—to prevent the return to power of the present Government. Those who sought progress should combine. Mr H. G. Ell said he had cast his first vote in Avon for a good radical, Mr W. W. Tanner.

A Voice: He gave a man a month for smiling! Mr Ell also urged consolidation of progressive forces. , Captain J. Walker then moved a vote of thanks and confidence to Mr Russell.

In response to calls from the back of the hall, Mr J. M'Combs, M.P., was asked to speak. He said he realised he was not of the party, and would choose his own platform from which to reply. The motion was seconded by Mr A. M, Loasby.

Mr E. Howard moved as an amendment that it should be of thanks only, and protested at great length against the Defence Act. His amendment was seconded.

Fourteen voted for the amendment. The motion was carried without further discussion.