REVIEW. MR-ROBB'S PAMPHLET ON SEPARTION.

Bruce Herald, Volume II, Issue 51, 30 March 1865, Page 4

REVIEW. MR- ROBB'S PAMPHLET ON SEPARTION.

(Continued from our last.)'

; We find Mr. Robb, like all th«se who write on subjects with the details of which tbey ai'e not acquainted,; is somewhat lavish of his cen-

- — *■ ■ ■— •» vim sure| on grounds which are quite untenable' We demur to accepting as a fact the statement that of the sum of nearly three millions of money for which the Colony has soon to pay, the far greater share will fall to be borne by the Middle Island Provinces, and by Otago in particular. We hope that during the next session of the General Assembly, we shall have a Select Committee minutely scrutinizing the past accounts, and rendering a full and detailed report of them. In the meantime we can only refer to the Allocation Act which thus apportions the three millions. For the suppression of the Rebellion £1,000,000. Immigration aiid Location some £900,000. Electric Telegraphs £75,000. Taranaki Relief £300,000. Imperial Government some-' where about £500,000, Now, when we come to consider that the far greater portion of the Electric Telegraphis in the middle Island — that the Immigration' and Location money will be -eumded by the' Provinces concerned, and by the sale of land, and part of the £500,000 is an old debt, we cannnot endorse Mr. Robb's statement. We utterly deny the assertion that the present stagnation of trade and Provincial distress is in any large measure connected with' the war. We have not, till within- the last tew weeks, begun to feel the pressure. Our' five-eighths ol revenue have been regularly received, and our surplus revenue regularly paid to as. There are other and more patent causes. The tightness of the London money market — our treatment ot the old established banks, both Colouially and Proviucially, — our' unwise anticipation of unrealized loans, — our' profuse expenditure beyond our revenue, — the clamant demands from our gold fields for' roads and bridges, and the natural depreciation of credit arising fronx the existence of a' rebellion in our midst. These have caused the evils we complain oil and led to our having unwisely expended the Provincial landed estate, without having obtained tiie only compensating payment, an increasing population. Our land i- a drug in the market indeed/ though not as Mr Robb says, reduced in value nearly one-half, because we have forced it before the public when there is no m.mey. Mr. Rot.b is not happy in his facts when he says respecting the removal of the Seat of Government, that three-fourths of the expense will ' fall to the hapless lot of poor Otago.' lie should have examined his ground and he would have' found that he had not a leg to stand upon. His figures, as before, are altogether out. Of course every separatiouist will consider the removal of the Seat of Government t> a cen-' tral and easily accessible place like Wellington,* a ciiVse, because it spoil's his" game. It is, how-* ever, a remedy, an efficient remedy for a disease. We cannot help smiling when we read the plaintive exclamation about wrecks, and more to come, — it is almost worthy of the ' Herald ' or ' Soiuhei n Cross-' of Auckland ; and, like the daily lucubrations of those worthies, mere fancy. We cannot follow Mr. Robb further in his> errors — errors of judgment arising from deficient information. He again- and again harps upon Otago paying three-fourths of the expenditure, a transparent delusion ; he cannot see in the past and present cautioning of lar're military bodies' in Irelanel, for which' England and Scotland have to r.ay, any analogy to onr' present transient state. One would th inkit was char enough. Will Mr. Robb condescend to support the following statements by' figures and arguments. ' Year alter year enormous debts have been incurred to' carry on a" confessedly absurd war.' We know he cannot, and we confess that we are ashamed that he should have been deceived. An equal, if a not greater fallacy is, that Auckland desires separation. Let the British Gov" eminent unmi-ttakeably tells her that she must carry on the war at her own expense, and she -will pitiavxly whine for union. Mr. Robb, echoing Mr. Harri's views, is an ! advocate for Otago being a separate colony.To those who know the real state of the Province, the very proposal is sufficiently ridiculous. Even separationists themselves-,, have dropped the idea, indeed, almost assert that they never held it ; and, really, if Mr. Robb is in earnest in his advocacy,- he had better niouify assertions Jike the iollowing,. which- every reader must know to 1 be only fiction :- That Otago possesses nearly one half of the middle Island — that she has, without doubt, one of the finest harbours that can : possibly exist anywhere.' — That 'her agricul-" tural capabilities are very great- in almost every portion of the Province.- — that she hag 4 valuable seams of copper,'— That Otago'con--tributes annually nearly three-fourths- of the : whole expense required to' carry on the General G overrun, nt — that 'at very little cost over the cost of her Provincial staff at present existing, she could have her sole and own Government kept and main-' tained.' Such ad\ocacy miy delude some men \\ ho may not have the leisure or the means,, or the disposition to inquire ; but, Mr. liobu may be assured that such unfounded asser-' tions will cause every impartial and diligent inquirer to revolt from a movement which is' as- the ' baseless fabrio of a- dream,' which can only be backed by the most unblushing,' mistateinent of facts. There are arguments in- favor of Separa-tion,-but the advocates of the movement shy' at them because they savor of matter-of-fact ;V but the arguments against it are, at present,, ; overwhelming.