The Press. FRIDAY, DECEMBER 18, 1896. TRUTHFULNESS IN OUR PUBLIC MEN.

Press, Volume LIII, Issue 9603, 18 December 1896, Page 4

The Press. FRIDAY, DECEMBER 18, 1896. TRUTHFULNESS IN OUR PUBLIC MEN.

Canon Stack, in his speech at Christ's College Commemoration, made some remarks which are deserving of the serious attention of all New Zealanders who hold the honour of their country dear. He said:— " The absence of truthfulness among oar public men was a deplorable fact. He was ashamed to say that when he was in England he did not like to admit that he was a New Zealander. because New Zealand at the present time had a bad reputation. Christ's College boys should determine to devote their lives to raisimr New Zealand from the position into which she had fallen, and endeavour to wipe away the disgrace that Avas upon it, and to make the name of a Christ's College boy a synonym for a Christian gentleman." Such a serious accusation, we may be sure, was not made without foundation. Painful as it is to have to admit the fact, Canon Stack's remarks merely confirm what has been said by English newspapers, and by other colonists who have recently returned from Great Britain. More than this, many in this country must have been driven to a similar conclusion from a close observation of our public afiairs. Wβ need not revive the unpleasant memories of what happened during the visit of the late Colonial Treasurer to England. We believe that Mr. Wabo was carried awajr bjf as

intense desire to secure the floating of the loan, to create a pleasant impression among those he met, and generally to make his mission appear a success. Thi3 and his optimistic temperament lod him into hastily committing himself to statements of fact and expressions of views which, taken in the light of after events, are certainly hard to justify. The prospectus issued before the million and a halt loan, Mr. Wakd's statements as to the " unpledged securities," his assurances to the Bank of New Zealand shareholders about the unlikelihood of another call, and his equivocal promises to the New Plymouth bond-holders-all combined to create an impression in England the reverse of favourable to the public character or New Zealand's rulers and statesmen. But it is not the late Colonial Treasurer alone who is to blame in this matter. There is a want of sincerity about other members of the Ministry which is painfully apparent, especially during times of heated political contest, and which cannot fail to exert a deteriorating effect on our standard of public morality. No harm would be done if only there were a healthy public opinion which would make it clear that above all things honesty and straightforwardness are required from our public men, and that failure in either of those qualities would speedily bring about ostracism from public life. But, unfortunately, this doas not seem to exist. Take the,case of the Hon. W. Hall-Jones, for example. When this gentleman presented himself to the electors of Timaru at the last election it was shown that immediately after his being taken into the Ministry he had swallowed nearly every opinion he had expressed while he was a private member. The fact that after this exposure he was again returned to the House we regard as a direct premium offered to place-seeking and political insincerity of the very worst type. Even the Premier of the colony is far from setting the example in the matter of truthfulness and fairness that we have a right to expect from one in his position. Wo have over and over again exposed in these columns the absolute misrepresentations of which he has been guilty. In his speeches when stumping the country, he did not confine himself to merely belauding his own policy and depreciating that of his opponents, which, within certain limits, is usually regarded as legitimate enough. To gain a point he did not hesitate to misrepresent facts to the detriment of others, in order to excite a prejudice either against a class or against a political opponent. Two cases in point may be recalled. In one' of his electioneering speeches Mr. Seddon misrepresented and distorted the facts under which Captain Eussell, nearly thirty years ago, obtained a grant of land for his military services. The matter had no bearing at all on the political questions of the hour. The simple truth was that Mr. Skddon thought that by twisting the facts and colouring the story he could create a prejudice against an opponent, and he did not hesitate to avail himself of these means. A still more flagrant case was his attempt on several platforms to represent Captain Russell as an advocate of Chinese immigration. He took for his purpose a speech delivered by, the honourable gentleman in 1878. At that time there was no Anti-Chinese Bill in existence, and the subject was only just beginning to be talked about. Captain Russell, who admitted that he had not had much experience of the Chinese, defended them from the charge of being an effete race, and said that if it could be done without interfering with the labour market he thought a few of them would be useful in the large cities " to perform menial offices which are not performed by Europeans willingly." Mr. Seddon twisted these remarks in such a way as to imply that Captain Russell was always in favour of the importation of Chinese cheap labour, and would favour it at the present time if lie got a chance. He entirely suppressed the fact that Captain Kussell had voted in favour of every anti-Chinese Bill that had been introduced, and that in the very speech which he (Mr. thus distorted for his purposes Captain Kussell had said that "if there should come a time when the Chinese were likely to overran this country as they had done in San Francisco it would be right to introduce some regulation to prevent any further influx of them." If Mr. Sbddon had quoted these words, and if he had stated what Captain Russell's action had been on every occasion when an Anti-Chinese Bill had come before the House, his speech would have failed in its object. Hβ would not have been able to create an unfair prejudice against the gallant Captain in the minds of those who had not the opportunity, or the leisure or the inclination to look into the facts for themselves—in" other words, as Mr. Seddon knew very -well, of at least 99 per cent, of his hearers. Such tactics, to our mind, were the more reprehensible because J they were directed against an honourable opponent who, as Mr. Seddon also very well knew, would not stoop to use similar weapons in return. It is no pleasure to us thus to have to find fault with the character of our public men. We would infinitely rather be in a position to point to them as men of probity and honour, whose word was good enough to stand against the world, put we cannot shut our eyes to the obvious facts. It, is plain that the standard of political morality has sadly deteriorated in this colony, in which it once stood as high as in any part of the world. _ We wish to see a healthier public opinion aroused, and the moral fibre of the community strengthened and braced. Canon Stack has done good service by his bold, outspoken words on the subject. If other leading colonists would speak out in the same courageous maaner a great deal would be done to remove the reproach tinder which we as a community are resting, owing to the laxity of our public men.