The Evening Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News and the Morning News. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 28, 1875

Auckland Star, Volume VI, Issue 1623, 28 April 1875, Page 2

The Evening Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News and the Morning News.

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 28, 1875

For the cause that lacks assistance. For the wrong tliat needs resisiiaci, *sr the f»ture in tha distance,. A»4 the icood that we can do.

While we hear pseana sung in praise of Mr Julius Vogel and the benign policy of Immigration and Public Works, we must insist on keeping before the public eye of Auckland what it has aone for Auckland. We are of those who hailed the conception of this policy aB having in it the germs of greatness for New Zealand, and as being capable of doing for the colony and for this province what no other policy heretofore produced in these seaa ■ had done for any colony. We feel therefore Justified in not only expressing our indignation and disgust at the unfairnesß with which it has been administered, but in keeping the public eye firmly fixed on the disastrous aspect which its results supply in this province. It

is possible, -we know, to elevate our minds so far as to rejoice in the advancement of the colony irrespective of what may be the case •with that portion of it in which we live. We have no doubt that is patriotism, which should always be disinterested;|butjwe confess we have not, and we think few of our fellow-citizens have, attained to that sublime spirit of self-immolation, and disinterested patriotism which can rejoice in 1 the result of a policy which, however beneficent to other portions of the colony, has come like a withering blight to Auckland. Every one knows that the ultimate good hoped from the combined policy of Public Works and Immigration was the settlement of a numerous and prosperous population, and that the Public Works were to be but the means for its attainment. Immigration and consequent settlement were the great want, and to the success of these we looked to benefit private interests, to promote the public welfare, and to recoup to the colony the cost of the working of the whole policy. A few days ago we gave the results of the working of the policy in increasing the number of settlers in so far as Auckland province is concerned. We must refer to it again, and we demand an explanation from those whose duty and whose privilege it is to defend Mr Vogel and all his doings against allcomers. And how, we ask, is it that, as shewn by the census (leaving out Westland and Nelson, whose circumstances are exceptional), the increase in the population of the province during the years of the regime of " Immigration and Public Works" has been, out of all proportion, the smallest among all the provinces of New Zealand ? How is it that while the percentage of increase has been in Marlborough 17 ; in Otago, 22 • in Wellington, 24 ; in Canterbury, 25 ; in Hawkes Bay, 52 ; it has been m Auckland only 8? Why is it that the policy has worked in this partial way ? Why is it that a policy emanating from the hand of a representative of Auckland has been so disastrously unfair to Auckland ? What are the peculiar circumstances of this province that have necessitated its receiving in net results of settlement such a glaring disproportion of benefits ? But this is not the only comparison in respect of settlement which the people of Auckland should consider, and on which the apologi.sts of the General Government should be ready to furnish an explanation. How is it that in no censuf period, since Ihe census was first taken in New Zealand, has the increase of the population in this province been so small as during the era of Hit Immigration and Public Works Policy ? In the triennial period ending in 1801, the increase of population in Auckland showed a per centage of 34 - -we omit the decimals ; in that of ISC4 it was 72 ; in that ending ISG7, embracing the time of depression and the exodus after the war, it was 14; in that ending in 1871 it was 29 ; and in that ending in 1874,theperiodof the administrationof thia noble and beneficent policy, it was 8. How is this ? Eow does it come that never before had the increase of the settlement in this province been anything like so small as during the period in which the Immigration and Public Works policy of the hon member for Ciiy East has been in full swing? We ask the people of Auckland to think of this ; we ask the blind unscrupulous defenders of the Ministry to answer this. How is it that this province has fallen far out of sight behind the other provinces during this era of Immigration and Works? How is it that the province never before, in the same length of time, progressed so little, or in anything approaching to so little, as during the full, and unbridled career of the present C olonial policy ? The thing is so extraordinary as to be hardly credible. Nevertheless it is true, and we want to know the reason why.