Evening Post. THURSDAY, JULY 28, 1881.

Evening Post, Volume XXII, Issue 24, 28 July 1881, Page 2

Evening Post. THURSDAY, JULY 28, 1881.

"THE BEGINNING OF THE END." ? If we may aooept the assurances given last nisht by Major Atkinson on the one hand, and by Mr. Sheehan on the other, this evening will witness " the beginning of the end" in respect to the present political crisis. Those gentlemen stated that a distinct agreement had been arrived at on both sides to bring the no-confidence debate to a close to-night, or, at least, before another adjournment of the House, even if the sitting were consequently protracted until to-morrow morning. Both the contending parties had, it was alleged, agreed to take the division before the next rising of the House. This is, indeed, comforting news. So utterly dreary, flat, and uninteresting a debate as that which is now in extremis, has, perhaps, never before been inflicted on a much-enduring country. Why it is that noconfidence delates, which in termer days used to be both interesting and exciting, Bhould now have degenerated into such intolerably dismal affairs, we are not prepared to say authoritatively. But there can be no possible question as to their grievous

and steady deterioration. They have been growing worse and worse year after year, until the present climax of miserable drivel has been reached. We cannot conceive the possibility of their falling lower in point of interest. Yet it ia eaid that in every deep is to be found a deeper still, and it may be that there are profundities of bathos and dullness yet unfathomed, to the exploration of which the next Parliament will devote its earnest attention. It may be so, but we earnestly hope not. We should entertain a feeling of deep pity for the hearers or readers upon whom should be inflicted more wearisome tirades of tiresome twaddle and stale platitudes than those ©f which we have lately been treated to such allopathic doses. The public really could not stand it. It is true human nature does become inured by degrees to the most utter misery, but not to such a purgatory as that. The worm would turn at last, and Parliament would be told — " Tax U3 to death if you like, ruin us, take away all our liberties, oppress and crush us if you will, but do not, oh, do not bore us. We can stand all but that !" Readers of "Erewhon" will recollect that the most cruel punishment inflicted on malefactors in the remarkable country which that book describes was committal to the " Asylum for Incurable Bores," as subjects for operation on the part of the patients. With such lively horror was this dreadful punighment regarded that it was customary for prisoners sentenced to so terrible a fate to implore, with teais of passionate entreaty, that their sentence might be commuted to roasting alive or some other punishment which was deemed slight in comparison with suffering perpetual boredom. It is this dread fate which is now being imposed on the hapless colonists of New Zealand. They are daily crammed ad nauseam with noconfidence debates, which do not appeal to a single interest or sympathy. If we might hazard a conjecture as to the reason why such utter dullness pervades no-confidence debates now-a-days, we should say it is because they are scarcely ever conducted on a genuine and straightforward issue. It is all intrigue and trickery and side-winds and snrprises and little dodges- An exMinißter ©f the Crown makes it his highest boast that he has " euchred " his opponents. " To euchre " may or may not be a Parliamentary verb, but it expresses only too clearly — albeit somewhat vulgarly — what seems to be the great ambition of our New Zealand public men in the present day. Npconfidence motions are not brought on in good faith by the leader of a recogDised and reputable Opposition party, and decided in fair fight. They are sought to be " sneaked" in by all sorts of ingeniops but disingenuous davices. One man tries to outwit and overreach his neighbour, and the result of a division is settled wholly by backstairs intrigue and secret caucus. Nothing exercises less influence on results than the debates in Parliament. There, members talk merely for the sake of talking. They may or may not believe a single word they are saying, but, at any rate, they are quite certain of one thing — that not a single vote will be guided in the smallest degree by the dreary chatter which they persist in forcing on the long-suffering public. Surely, under these circumstances, they might come to some understanding to spare the country alike the expense and the nuisance of all this useless palaver, and dispense with the farce of pretending to endeavor to influence votes by discussion. The present debate has been a waste of time of the most utter and flagrant character, without a single rede a ming point. We rejoice greatly that at last " the beginning of the end " s^ems near at hand. We sincerely hope that it will be very long ere such another infliction has again to be endured.