The Press. MONDAY, DECEMBER 19, 1892. LIBERALISM AND PROGRESS.

Press, Volume XLIX, Issue 8359, 19 December 1892, Page 4

The Press. MONDAY, DECEMBER 19, 1892. LIBERALISM AND PROGRESS.

■y t M . Mr. Bbevbs on Wednesday night took much credit to himself and his party for their progreseiveness. As Liberals in the true sense we ourselves have nothing but admiration for a truly progressive spirit. The old Tory ideal of political and social stagnation as the sttmmum bonum, has never had a home iv this young country, and we doubt if it has existed even in England eince the Reform Bill. It really has no place anywhere except in the fertile imaginations ol the Hneialistia Raitusala.

who seek to -win popularity for their own pretensions to progresaiveness by depicting their opponents as wrapt in" somnolent inactivity. Bab though we believe progress to be toe motto of every party, there are vast differences in their methods of interpreting it in practise. What progress for example, can the party at present in power justly be credited with? if asked to indicate the direction their " progressiveness " has taken, they would probably point to the "wider sphere " they claim to have fciven the Legislative Council, to the " new character" they say tney have given to the army of the Great Unpaid, and to the institution of the Labour Bureau. These, at least, were the points Mr. Reeves laid most stress upon. Whether these things are in themselves good or bad it is not our purpose to discuss here; we are inclined to view them with indifierence, believing that as far as the substantial and material progress of the colony is concerned they are of no moment in the world. Four working men can write M.L.G. at the end of their signature; when they take their seats they will probaWy be neither better nor -worse than others who are there before them ; and if they distinguish theriiselves ac all ib will most likely be by their docility. Haifa-dozen workiug men will find themselves addressed on envelopes as J.P.s in future, and thi3 will be a source of innocent pleasure to their wives; when the turn comes round to their uames on the rota of Justices they "will doubtless take their seats with dignity aud give eommousensodecisioas. And as for the Bureau, there are many respectable people who keep registry offices, and there seems no objection to the Minister for Labour joining their ranks, except on the score of expense. If there ia a tree in the North islaud that wants felling, says Mr. Reeves, and a man iv the South Island that wants to fell it, the Bureau will put that man beside that tree. The honourable gentleman implied that this could be done by means of tho Government railways, but we will not cavil at a little geographical lapse of this kind.

What we do want to know is, What has all this to do with progress ? Can the members of the present Government; or the partjr who follow them, point to a single new industry or productive undertaking which owes its initiation to them ? They pride themselves on hawkiug a few labourers about the country —but hava they increased the demand for labour ? Is there ■ a single one of the industrial or agricultural institutions which do employ labour and do increase the wealth - producing capacities of the country that has been started by the so-called Liberals? What has been the result of all the bustling, meddling activity they pride themselves on ? It has been as unproductive as shuffling a pack of cards or moviug the men on a chess board. The only kind of progress they are responsible for are the progresses of itinerant Ministers through the colony ia search of banquets and cheap popularity,

Bub if we look into the past of the colony we "find all the substantial (.elements in its progress spring from 'the. party which ia called Conservative. The Radicals seem to use the term as though it conveyed some peculiar sense of opprobrium. Anyone acquainted with the traditional principles of Liberalism will have no difficulty in deciding which party in New Zealand has the best claim to the* title—the 'Socialistic Radicals, or their opponents. But we have no quarrel with Conservatism which means the conservation of the best interests of tho country, the great agricultural and pastoral, commercial and industrial institutions, which provide employment for ita population and wealth for their maintenance. And the party which is alone responsible for the creation of these is not unnaturally moat interested in conserving them. Look over tho electoral lists, run through names that are prominent in the politics of the colony, and on which side do you fiud the pioneers of progress who have advanced the material prosperity of the colony ? Those of thß early settlers who still survive, the men who endured the hardships of the pioneer and opened up the country for settlement, are they among the Radicals who stump the country with their empty talk and Socialistic platitudes? Almost withr out a single exception they belong to the party Mr. Reeves wonld hold up to scorn a3 the enemies of progress. Then when tho country became gradually more populous, when cities grew up and we were able to produce something for export to other countries, who were the men that organised trade, and founded such institutions as the New Zealand Shipping Company, for example ? Again the Conservatives. Who took the initiative in organising our intercolonial and coastal trade 1 Who were the promoters, for instance, of the Union Shipping Company, which gives employment to nearly 3000 men, and spends between £300,000 and £400,000 annually in wagee and ealariee iv the colony 1 Once more the Conservatives, The men again who initialed and carry on such productive institutions as the Kaiapoi Woollen Company and the Mosgiel Company will be found without exception in the ranks of the party Mr. Reeves thinks fit to despise as uuprogressive. When our flocks increased, and the demand for wool alone would not make pastoral pursuits remunerative men whose names will be found in the ranks of the same party instituted the frozen meat companies, which have been tho commercial salvation of the colony. Look where you will among our great industries and you will find it ia the Conservatives who have been the party of progress. It is to their pluck and perseverance, to their enterprise and public spirit, that every industry and every financial institution in the colon j owes its origin. And their enterprise has been rewarded? Quite true; refrigerating works, dairy factories, Shipping Companies are not scarted for charitable aid purposes; but it ia not the promoters of them alone who reap the benefit. What would the population of the country do without them! If there were not these Industrial organisers and brain workers where would tho labouring classes find a market far their toil? It is nob merely

tho capitalists , money but tho capitalists' energy and capacity for organisation that are necessary to the welfare of every class in the community. If tue commerce, the industries aud the agriculture of the colony were loft to the Sooialistio Radicals for a single year the population would be starving. Their energy ia of the destructive, not of the constructive kind. Their activity lies only in their tongues. They have a pretty genius for puiiiug down, and never trouble themselves about buiMing up. At passing meddlesome legislation, at placing restrictions on the spontaneous development of industry, they are adepts, but for initiative and enterprise you have to look to the only truly progressive party in the colony—the so-called Conservatives.