The Daily Southern Cross.

Daily Southern Cross, Volume XXIII, Issue 3131, 30 July 1867, Page 3

The Daily Southern Cross.

LTJOKO, NON UEO. If I h»r« b««i •xtlnguiilud, y«t tbtra tiu A. tboni«nd batooni bom th« ipwk I bora.

TUESDAY, JULY 30.

In another place we publish the report of the debate on Mr. Vogel's financial resolution, from the Wellington Independent of the 25th July. We have not space for any further detailed reports of Parliamentary proceedings in this issue. Our readers will perceive, however, how completely the hopes of this province have been disappointed by those in whom it trusted. "We desire to attribute blame to no one in particular, beyond the inference which the report fairly warrants us in drawing. We think it will be admitted by every candid person that the majority of the Auckland members put themselves entirely into the hands of Mr. Vogel and Mr. Macandrew, and that they assumed a like abnegation of their public functions by the representatives of Wellington. In this they were disappointed. Dr. Featherston appears to have played with the Opposition, not committing himself to anything beyond a general vindication of provincial institutions. The consequence was ' that he rose early in the debate, and,-, threw himself between, the OJoyernment and the Opposition,

He was not prepared to turn, out the Government on any such question ; and Mr. Vogel, with his usually keen perception, seeing at once the main prop of his scaffolding kicked from under him, was fain to come to terms immediately to prevent a humiliating and ugly fall. From that point all ' interest in the debate was lost. Mr. Yogel's opening speech was a failure. It did not raise the issue Auckland had a right to expect in any sense. On the contrary, it was carefully avoided. Mr. Vogel appears tous to be lamentably ignorant of the leading principles of the science of finance ', and of all colonial politicians he is one of the last to whom we would entrust themanagement of the Treasury. If Mr. Ward had remained in the colony, and taken the lead of the Provincial party, we should have had no scruple to entrust to him the management of the Treasury ; but amongst the speakers on the i Opposition side in the debate, there was not a I single man competent to bring forward an acceptable budget. ; But if Mr. Vogel kept back the Northern I argument, surely there was no excuse why this point should have been ignored by Mr. Williamson, and those who followed him on his side. It appears, however, that the Superin- ! tendent of Auckland is impressed with the one idea, that if the management of native affair were entrusted to himself in Auckland, there would soon be an end to "war's alarms." The "piping times of peace" would come again, when the Maoris would crowd our streets, selling their produce and buying our imports j and in view of that happy future he overlooked our finance, our taxation, our debt, our postal inoonveniences, the misgovernment of both races, and the necessity for insular Separation or a Northern Executive. The one thought absorbed his faculties quite ; and he saw or thought of nothing else. So we conclude from the outline of his speech ', and we likewise suspect that he propounded the very dangerous doctrine that the Maoris would best be governed by keeping them away from our law courts and dealing with them on all questions of right, or matters of bargain, by the head of the Provincial Executive. Mr. Hall properly replied that what Mr. Williamson objected to was that which would educate the natives to respect and obey the law. But Mr. Williamson seems to have spent the last six or seven years in a dream. He might as well have gone to sleep in the beginning of 1860 and remained 1 asleep till the beginning of 1867, for all he appears to have profited by the past. ■ He forgets the ohanges that have taken place in the habits and character of the natives. He forgets the altered relative position of the races. He fails to see that it is now physically impossible for the natives to supply Auckland with wheat from the Waikato, by the canoe passage of the Awaroa to Waiuku, for the simple reason that they do not possess the country, and that if they did own it, they are not numerous or industrious enough to supply the wants of the present European population, He forgets the extended commercial relations of Auckland ',, — its rapid and frequent intercourse with all parts of the world by steam and sailing vessels, and how entirely this has changed the old conditions governing home production and supply from abroad. He still dreams of the past, and its fleets of canoes, and thousands of kits of wheat, kumeras, and potatoes j and thinks that by obtaining the control of native affairs in Auckland, he -will cuujure up tne peaceful time again when the mainstay of Auckland was the native trade. This would be to retrograde, no doubt j but the Superintendent will not see that. Our banking and insurance institutions would then be unnecessary; local industries and manufactures, as we see them around .us, would be superfluous, and would soon disappear. The spacious warehouses and shops would be tenantless, were Auckland reduced to the dimensions which Mr. Williamson would appear to contemplate. Our little wants would be supplied by native produce ; our commerce would be limited to slops and tobacco. There is no need to pursue this subject, however, because it would simply be impossible to restore the past, or any one of its conditions. The very absurdity of his argument ought to be apparent to Mr. Williamson and his followers ; but it is not, and menwho " feel they have a mission," and their disciples, seldom see the weak points in their own arguments. In this case Mr. Williamson believes sincerely that he could restore peace to the country, and we partly believe him ; but it would be by refraining altogether from interfering with the natives. To succeed, he must let them alone, and abandon the hope of buying preference blocks of land on account of the province. However, as his allies from the South capitulated without reference to himl self or his adherents, we suppose the matter is at rest for the session. The Provincial, party, on their own field of battle— having had choice of time and place — proved to be but an undisciplined host. There was no common interest to bind them together ; and we trust the lesson at least will not be lost upon the Auckland members. Mr. Carleton and Mr. O'Neill took the right course, by moving the Separation amendment, which ought to have been the Auckland battle cry ; but strange to say, neither Mr. Dignan, Mr. Macfarlane, nor any other Auckland member spoke in support of it. What does this mean ? Is it to be taken that the rank and file of the Auckland party felt themselves aggrieved ;— felt that they had been played upon, trifled with, and deceived ? i We very much fear that this is the construction that must be put upon their silence. Otherwise, we must regard their sojourn in Wellington as having worked a wonderful change in their opinions. However, time will tell. We trust no worse thing may happen than this, for judging by the Auckland vote against the Government amendments the Goldfields resolution, which recognised the principle of Executive responsibility to the Council in all provincial affairs, we think their leading to have been of a faulty character. '