The Clutha Leader. THURSDAY, DEC. 2, 1875.

Clutha Leader, Volume II, Issue 73, 2 December 1875, Page 5

The Clutha Leader. THURSDAY, DEC. 2, 1875.

A stocl£ argument used by those who "oppose the seperation of the two Islands is, that such a step would be opposed by the public creditor, and that he has the power to .pretent.it. This was a strong taken point. ii'p. by Sir P. DA Bell Sa bis recent speecn to the electors fif Waikouaiti. But even the leading abolition journal the Colony— the ' New Zealand Times' — has in very forcible terms pointed out the absurdity of the argument. It is apparently disgusted with its oft repetition,' and in reference to its use by Sir Francis, the "'Tinned asks : : "Where is the use of using the * public creditor" argument he does against Mr Macandrew ? It is' the veriest puerility.' The public creditor lent New. Zealand nearly twenty millions sterling tinder a Constitution of which Provincial Government formed an important part. This impersonal financial potentate, 'the public creditor,*' did not question, the security, never objected to provincial institutions, and does not care the snap of his fingers whether they be two Provinces or forty, or whether they be abolished altogether, provided his interest is f paid punctooal.' And as Mr "Macandrew does not contemplate making default to the public creditor any more: than Sir Francis, the public creditor need not. be lugged into the discussion.-: .It-lii a dbf mestio question, pure and simple, with which the public creditor has -nothing to do,"

TiHE7Gomp;laint still continues to .',be $dx vtinoe'd against the party known as the Opposition, that they are npt united as to'the policy that should fye pursued upon the abolition question. This complaint arises \n some measure from. a misapprehension as to the proper functions of an- Opposition; The , chief function of an Opposition is to criticise. Jn opposing a measure brought forward by the Government, individual members may indicats the direction in which in thoir opinion a change should be made. It by no means follows that this opinion is the opinion ot the party. Ihe point in which in opposing, say a Bill, they are agreed is, that they do not approve of ;the Bill. It may be that some consider the law as it stands better'than the law proposed to be substituted for it, whilst others may consider that the law, if changed at a'l, should be changed in some other way. than that proposed. To apply this to the Abolition Bill, the point on which the Opposition were all agreed, was this, that they did not approve of the Bill. This was the ground common to all. Some may have thought the ; ill altogether unnecessary. Indeed it is evident that some were of this opinion. Others may have thought that if" a change was to be made, the change proposed by the Government was not the change that should be made. It was quite clear that some really did entertain this opinion. To blame the Opposition, therefore, for want of uniformity of opinion on the course that should now be pursued with respect to the abolition question, is to blame them for what cannot be expected at the hands of an Opposition. No elector, therefore, fhoula allow this to influence him in withholding his vote from any member of the party known as the Opposition. On the contrary, there are several considerations that should weigh with him in inducing him to support members of that party, and candidates professing the same views. We have said that 'one ground common to all v?as, that they did not approve of the Abolition Bill. This, however, was not the only point common to them. They were all of this opinion that a change so radical as the one contemplated should not be given effect to without first consulting the constituencies. The Government were desirous of abolishing the provinces at.once.. The change contemplated was a great one. It had not been before the country when the Parliament was elected. Thq_ session too in which it was proposed tQ give effect to this change, was the last' one of the Parliament. These, and many other reasons did the Opposition advance for delaying the coming into operation of the Bill. After a great deal of strenuous exertion and hard fighting against fearful odds, they at last in a great measure succeeded in the object they had in view T . It is entirely through the efforts of the Opposition that the country has an opportunity of considering- the question. of the kind of Government they desire to live under. For this the electors ought to be grateful to the Opposition. The Opposition certainly shewed that they entertained much more correct views of true liberty than tho Government and their party, who were desirous, without consulting tjie people, to thrust upon them a great constitutional change. They certainly showed a much more correct idea than the Government party of what is due to the country on the eve of a general election. Doubtless the electors will not forget these things when they come to place their voting papers in the ballot-boxes.