THE SUPERINTENDENCY QUESTION AND THE OTAHUHU MEETING.

Daily Southern Cross, Volume XXIII, Issue 3019, 30 March 1867, Page 6

THE SUPERINTENDENCY QUESTION AND THE OTAHUHU MEETING.

To tho Editor of the Dally Southern Cross. ' Sib, — I was very much disappointed at the tone taken by the Otahuhu meeting on Tuesday last, with regard to the question of the Superintendency. We were told by one of the speakers (Mr. Buckland) that it was not competent for the .Agricultural Society to take cognizanoe of political matters. Now, I differ with that gentleman on this head, and for these reasons : we have no political society in Auckland, whose duty would be to take up that and other questions ; and, therefore, in the absence of suoh a society, I hold ifc to ba a perfectly legitimate, fair, and reasonable duty for the Agricultural Society to discuss Bnch questions of policy as relate to the ameliorating of the condition of tbe province at this critical juncture of its affairs ; and, above all other subjects of policy, the Superintendency is one that bears a very close affinity to the real interests of the Agricultural^ Society itself. We are to presume that the objects of these societies are to give information to agriculturists as to the best mode o£ rearing cattle nnd raising crops, and to encourage them by the holding of annual shows, and giving premiums for the besfc-ploughed field, &c; the best sample of wheat, oats, barley, &c. ; the be»t horse, cow, sheep, pig, &c; the best fowl, &c. : and as none of these things can be done without land, and as the Superintendent of the province has a great deal in his power in regard tVereto, I repeat it is most oompe« tent for such a society to take up this very question of the Superintendenoy. But if Mr. Bucklaud denies the competency of the Agricultural Society to deal with political matters, why do not he and others ! organise » society that will do so? Does he believe there is no necessity for a society of this kind ? Ob, 1 forgot ; Mr. Buckland is about retiring from politics altogether, and going to develop the resources of the country. Very good ! I hope there *re xa&ny more that Will go ln& do like* wise. But I should not at all wish that every one would confine himself to the buying of land merely, and stocking it with sheep and cattle as Mr. B. ia already doing. Ido not think — however desirable it is to have cheap beef and mutton — that it WOUld be at all developing the resources of the country if every one wer« similarly engaged, because there are many other resources that require development — resources that would employ labour in a far greater degree than keeping a few shepherds and stockmen. If Mr. Buckland, in his laudable object of developing the resources of the country, would take a few dozen of our unemployed labourers off the streets of. Auckland during the approaching winter or before it, I would indeed call him a benefactor of his race. If he and others employed their fellow-countrymen, instead of Maoris, they would lessen a great deal of the hardships which Europeans are now undergoing, and are, it is to be feared, still likely to undergo, if some more substantial means be not adopted to relieve them beyond, the mere cant of talk. But, sir, apart from this, it is not at all incompatible with the duty of developing the resources of a country, or being a sound political economist, for a person at the same time to maintain and uphold his political principles and retain his political position ; unless, indeed, that selfishness actuated him to mind himself, and none but himself. It is such selfishness, I am sorry to Bay, taut has been the curse of Auckland. If every one so acted, how could the business of the country be conducted? What would become of England, if such were the case ? Why, many men who are the greatest benefactors of their race are members of the House of Commons, and take part in the leading political questions of the d»y, in the town and other localities. So much for Buck — I mean Buckingham. The Otahuhu meeting met for a specific object, but ifc ia very much to be regretted they did not confine themselves to that object, instead of discussing the private affairs of [a gentleman. Bah ! It was unworthy of persons boasting of the name of Englishmen, and I am. only surprised that some one honourable enough did nob stand up in Ms place to protest against such an outrageous proceeding. If the private affairs of every one who would thus talk were known, I would ask, how many among them could cast stones ? But 1 apprehend very much that, if Mr. Williamson should contest the Superintendency, the people, in whose hands it really is to return him, will not endorse the opinion, of the few small talkers at the Otahuhu meeting. I imagined, when I read the advertisement in your columns, calling that meeting together, that the objectjwas first to canvass the real merits of what a Superintendent ought to be — to put the right man in the right place — and then to call upon that person to allow himself to be nominated, and then to throw the weight of their influence into the scale to secure his entrance. The Otahuhu meeting have not done this ; therefore, the result of its assembling was a failure. Sir, whether Mr. Williamson does or does not come forward as a candidate fortheSuperintendency, in justice to that gentleman it must be said of him that he was the employer of a great amount of labour in Auckland, that his capital was spent in that direction, and that he was the cause of making many homes comfortable and happy. Of how many of his slanderers could the same be said? Fiat justitia, ruafc coelum. — I am, Sec,,, ANTHROPO3. March 27, 1867.