The Daily Telegraph SATURDAY, APRIL 23, 1881.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3065, 23 April 1881, Page 2

The Daily Telegraph SATURDAY, APRIL 23, 1881.

Mr Ohmond's speech on Thursday night at Waipawa was certainly the best postsessional address that baa yet been delivered by a private member of the House. In very many respects it was better than Major Atkinson's, and, stripped of the personal explanations contained in Mr Bryce's speech at Wanganui, it was of more interest than that of the late Native Minister's. The address was peculiarly characteristic of the speaker ; it was utterly devoid of ornamentation; there was not a word in it calculated to provoke a lau-jb, or to " fetch the crowd." It dealt wholly and solely with hard facts, and valuable suggestions, which, coming from one eminently fitted by a lengthened experience in colonial and political life, were in the highest degree of interest to the country at large. Following in the same line that he marked out last session, Mr Ormond referred to the impossibility of a General Assembly dealing satisfactorily with measures that cor-Id not by any means be made equally applicable to all parts of the colony. Since abolition of provincialism there had been nothing to replace institutions that were from their constitution specially adapted to provide for the varying wants of t ..e several districts that made up the provinces of New Zealand. However much Parliament might devote itself to those subjects, it could never deal with them with such thoroughness as could the old Provincial Councils, the members of which possessed special knowledge of the particular wants of the communities they represented. Mr Ormond again expressed his conviction that the total I abolition of provincialism was a mistake ; that with the altered condition of the colony provincialism should have been modified, not swept away. But we have repeatedly heard it stated that it is easy enough for any ot,e to assert that a modified form of provincialism should have been adopted, instead of tbe county system, but that it is no easy matter to say what form modified provincialism should take. Mr Ormond pointed out sufficiently clearly what in his opinion would be preferable to the local governing jumble that we have now got. He spoke of Local Boards of Works for the administration of waste lands aud charitable aid. These Boards would be the distributing bodies to the Road Boards, would have taxing and borrowing powers, and the power to make bye-laws affecting interests peculiar to the districts over which they administered, such as, for instance, impounding, fencing, public reserves, assessment of sheep, inspection of cattle, &c. These bye-laws would have all the effect of provincial enactments, and would have the advantage ot being framed so as to specialy suit individual districts. Boards of Works might also have the control of the railways within their jurisdiction ; and it might tend to increased profits it each provincial district were made responsible for the profitable working of the railway running through it. Were such a system introduced we should hear no more of political railwayp, no more of castiron tariff rules ; and no more delays in the obtamment of requirements essential to the increase of the traffic. It is only by tbe simplification of administration that we can hope to secure economy in government, the abatement of taxation, and tbe consequent attractiveness of the colony to men of capital. Departing from that part of his speech that treated of local government, we come next to where Mr Ormond referred to the administration of native lands, and we are glad to notice that he disagreed with the policy of the Ministry in wholly abandoning the purchase of Maori country. There can be no doubt that very many of the bargains entered into on behalf of the Government by agents paid by commission were thoroughly bad, but, on the other hand, there were others which, if completed, would have.proved valuable additions to the waste lands of the colony. We may instance that of Patetere. which, but for private pressure, could have been just as easily acquired for the Crown as for a company of capitalists. Mr Ormond's scheme was surely tbe wisest, namely to divide native lands under negotiation for purchase into three classes, one in which it was desirable to complete the Crown's title ; the second, in which the negotiations might be deferred ; the third, in which the negotiations might be advantageously abandoned. Considering how large a proportion of the colonial revenue may be derived in the future from the sale of waste lands, it appears most short-sighted to abandon a source of income in favor of private speculators and capitalists. Thus we see that on two very important points Mr Ormond differs with the Ministerial policy, namely, upon internal administration, and native land pui chase. Ho is also not at one with the Government in the matter of the incidence of taxation, nor in the manner in which reductions in the Civil Service have been carried out. His concluding remarks will find favor with all classes. He said that, constituted as the House is at present, Ministers are unable to pass any large measures; they tried and failed last year, and they could not hope to be more successful next session. The property tax had been introduced without the people being afforded an opportunity of expressing an opinion upon this new imposition ; he would, therefore, advocate next session that the House should confiaeiteelfto passing a Representation Bill, and voting the necessary supplies. A dissolution should then take place to allow the people to express their opinions. With these views we are certain Mr Ormond will find many in the to coincide, and we should not be surprised if he gathered around him a following in Parliament that could not fail to make his influence felt.