The Evening Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News, and Echo. SATURDAY, JUNE 13, 1891.

Auckland Star, Volume XXII, Issue 139, 13 June 1891, Page 4

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

SATURDAY, JUNE 13, 1891.

, For the cai__o that lac_3.ts-_.ta-.c_, For the ..ions that nc.__ reciatanoo, For th_ future ia tho _i_.__.co, : ■ And tho Bocd that -570 eon do.

The brisk passage-at-arms in the House yesterday afternoon between the Minister for Lands and his predecessor in office is merely the preliminary skirmish which precedes the general attack. The members of the Opposition are prepared to overhaul in the most vigorous manner the retrenchment which the Government have effected during the recess. They are stimulated to make an attempt to smite the Liberal policy hip and thigh by the popularity they know such a procedure will give them among their friends in the Civil Service who are smarting under retrenchment. Mr McKenzie is especially singled out as a target for the shafts of the Opposition. He is the bete noir of the Civil servants, and the attacks madeon him by the Conservative press far exceed in virulence those to which his colleagues have been subjected, The Minister for Lands, however, is not the sort of man to imitate his countryman.who, when he was seen walking through an orchard and asked where he was going, promptly replied, " Back agen." A fortnight ago he triumphantly met the allegations which had been hurled at him by Mr Spence, late Commissioner of Crown Lands for Southland, and he shows quite as much vigour in defending his jpolicy against an ex-Cabinet Minister as in replying to the aspersions of an ex-civil servant. It is no doubt chiefly owing to the exigencies of his position that every change made by Mr McKenzie in his department has the appearance of reflectingunfavourablyuponthe conduct of his predecessor in office. This was inevitable from the widely-different views which the two administrators have respectively held with regard to retrenchment. When in opposition the present Ministers persistently maintained that a large curtailment of departmental expenditure was absolutely necessary, and could be effected without impairing the vigour of the service. The freely-expressed strictures on the alleged incompetency of the officers of the department over which Mr McKenzie is in charge, is an especially sore point with his predecessor, and serves to introduce a personal element into the dispute which is, to say the least, undesirable. The appointment of a Live Stock Committee gave Mr Richardson the opportunity , he sought of a general attack upon his successor's policy. The chief bone of contention with regard to the Stock Department, is the appointment of Mr Ritchie as its chief, a measure which Mr McKenzie's opponents characterise as a scandalous piece of favouritism, and which the Inspectors naturally look upon as a reflection upon their own fitness for the post. The explanation which the Minister of Lands gave when addressing his constituents a short time ago, fully justifies his action from his own standpoint. He states that on taking charge of the Stock Department, he found it in a most disorganised state. This certainly arose from no lack of provision for supervising the work. No less than six inspectors, one for each provincial district, were drawing handsome salaries and sending in accounts for travelling expenses, although, unlike the immortal Gulliver, some of them seem to have very seldom travelled at all. These gentlemen were specially unsuccessful in " keeping down rabbits," a fact which we do not mention at all to their discredit, as their experience has been largely shared by their brother rabbit catchers in New South Wales, who, even with the aid of stoats and weasels, have left the rabbits very much "as they were." But their offence (Mr McKenzie tells us) was aggravated by the fact that although bunny flourished and increased under the inspectors' mild regime, yet the six gentlemen each year spent thousands of pounds in rabbit hunts without any control from the head office in Wellington. This assertion, which reflects more on the late Minister than the Inspectors, and which Mr McKenzie says he makes on the strength of documentary evidence, is calculated to put Mr Richardson on his mettle; but apart from it, the only solution of the difficulty that presented itself to Mr McKenzie's mind was to put some one in charge of the Stock Department who would reside in Wellington and be responsible to the Minister for his actions. Now, we all know that when any billet which carries with it a high salary — a year for three _ years—is created, the fortunate individual on whom it is conferred will be clamoured at even if he be as meek as Moses or as wise as Solon. The clamour usual in such cases was in this instance intensified by the fact that after giving an eagle glance through tho Department, the Minister's choice fell upon, not an inspector, but upon Mr Ritchie, a station manager "who had done good inputtin-' down the rabbits on the Mount Royal Estate." We are not informed as to the modus operandi, nor whether Mr Ritchie resorted 10 poisoning, trapping, or the stoat and weasel racket; but the indignant inspectors and their friends are not unnaturally indisposed to "admit ihe superior efficacy of Mr

Ritchie's recipe, and the Conservative press, so far from admitting that gentleman's qualifications, declares his appointment a piece of rank jobbery, and maintains that from the inspectors a choice could have been made in every way suitable for the newly-created post. The best defence Mr McKenzie has made, so far as his choice of Mr Ritchie is concerned, is that since that gentleman has held the position he has effected a clear saving to the colony at the rate per annum over and above his own salary. We are informed that in twelve months Mr Ritchie will be able to effect a still greater saving. This, so far, is satisfactory, but while we fully concur in a vigorous retrenchment policy, we hope it will not be necessary to take this case as a precedent. The practice of going outside a department in making appointments should only be resorted to in extreme cases, or where a specialist is required. Either the six inspectors are totally unfit for their duties, or a crying injustice has been done to them. The most ardent advocate of reform will admit that officers who have Ions: been in the service of a department have, all things being equal,, the strongest claim for promotion. We do not think Mr McKenzie makes his case stronger by implying that the inspectors neglect their work for the charms of the tennis-lawn or the excitement of the racecourse. Such inuendoes savour rather too much of a display of Ministerial temper. Either the inspectors neglect their duties or they do not. If they attend to their legitimate work, no one has any right to sneer at them for sharing with their fellow-citizens in relaxations that suit their tastes ; if in their pursuit of pleasure, they are neglecting necessary work, then the sooner they are superseded by worthier men the better. But although it may be "merely a question of taste," ail lovers of fairplay will agree that it is undesirable that the utterances of a Cabinet Minister should give an importance to matters which are probably trivial, and that indulgence in amusements should be scarcely brought up against gentlemen who have no chance of defending themselves.