THE PREMIER IN NAPIER.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXII, Issue 7810, 1 August 1887, Page 2

THE PREMIER IN NAPIER.

Sir Robert Stout addressed a meeting of the electors of Napier in the Gaiety Theatre on Saturday evening. There was a very large attendance, the building being packed. Mr H. Williams occupied the chair, and in introducing the speaker said that he would have been glad to see the Mayor in the chair, as a mark of respect to the Premier. Sir Robert Stout, who on rising was greeted with enthusiastic applause, said he had great pleasure in responding'^ to the request of the Liberals ot Napier IH that he should address them. (At this " stage some person whose remarks" were unintelligible commenced to interrupt, and was shown the door.) He thought it would be a sad day for New Zealand when a colonist should be debarred from discussing grave political questions with his fellow colonists because some local prints objected. He had not been able to read the local papers, but when he was on his way to Auckland he asked a friend to save for him all the leading articles published by the Hekald and Telegraph. On arriving that morning he had been handed a bundle of leaders, but although he had spent about an hour trying to understand them, he had failed to .do so. He could see, however, that if personal criticism was taken out of tbero there was not much left. Some of the statements made were so opposed to fact that he pitied the editors. He said to himself that it was surprising editors could be so ignorant, seeing that they had access to Hansard and official papers. He would set before them the policy of the Government and the policy of the Opposition so far as it ivas enunciated, and he would ask them to consider those policies apart from personal feeling'or bias. The papers seemed afraid of him coming to Napier, but he thought that if they wanted the trnth they should be glad to hear him, if he only put one side of i the question before them. He might say that no criticism had the slighest effect upon him, and he would give utterance to his opinions whether they pleased or offended. We were on the eve of a general election, and the Government had cone to (he country with a distinct policy/but he noticed that some of the editors would noc even touch it with the points of their pens, but raised all kinds of side issues. There was a third class of politicians who sat npou a rail, looking to see which side was the best. In the words of the poet Well, well, it s a mercy we ve fellows to tell us The rights and the wrongsof theso things, any. how, And that Providence sends us oracular follows Who sit on tho fonce and slang those at the plough. He was one at the plough, and he thought that some of those who sat on the fence and criticised the work would do very poor work for themselves. The Government had laid down retrenchment as ' one liue of their policy. Strange to Sft^g' the Opposition re-echoed the cry. Whiftr the Government had been in office they had earned on economically and if they had been properly supported, and had a stronger party, even greater economies could be effected. They had effected savings never effected before. He would not have time to go through' all the figures, but he would give them a few illustrations. They had saved on the San Francisco service, as official records would show. Formerly the colony was at the mercy of the other colonies and of the contractors, and the then PostmasterGeneral seemed to have no mind of his own -and no power of laisiness. The Government saved £700O;i : 5jear on the service, and on the cable" jsubsidy £5000. Dimng two years they" hail-largely saved in the railway department. " Since 1885 they had opened 250 miles of new railways, with 50 or 60 new stations, and the requisite officers, and that had been done at an additional cost of only £9000. One of the sapient papers said that there was less traffic, but that was not so. The season ticket travellers had increased fromS999in 1884-85 to 11821 in 1886-7; passengers increased from 3,232,889 to 3,426,403 ; there had been an increase of 2,000,000 sheep and cattle carried ; and an increase of parcels from 347,425 to 373.397. Some said that the Government only proposed economy because of the elections, but those he had named were carried out before last session commenced. The next quession was that of the Civil Service. The Government proceeded on definite lines, so that as the years rolled on economy could "be promoted, and not to have retrenchment one year and increases the next, as was the case with all Governments but his. The Government passed the Civil Service Bill, yet the Herald, the leading paper • said on July 21st that the bill was laughed out of the House. (Applause.) That was the species of criticism against the Government. Certainly the bill was amended by the Upper House, who substituted for the principle of nomination of candidates by members of the House the principle of all appointments being secured by competitive' examination. No one except an expert could enter the service now except as a lad, and the Civil Service was open to all in the colony, those who obtained the highest marks in competitive examination.? securing situations. They went further, and abolished pensions. Of course pensions had been abolitfijk many years before, but what the Gcfern^ ment did was this: Formerly when a man was dismissed from the Service, except for misconduct, he was entitled to an allowance of one "month's pay for every year he had worked. The Government altered all that, and provided that in future all civil servants should be regarded as under three-month engagements only and should be entitled to ho eompensation for loss of office. In order that civil servants should not be turned adrift with nothing they deducted 6 per cent, from their salaries, and this went to a fund for providing for civil servants when dismissed or for their families if they died. The Government also provided for classifying the Service, and that if an olfioer retired it did not follow that his suocessor should have as high a salary, and when the Secretary for the Customs retired Ins successor only received £550 a year instead of £1000. If experts were appointed their names had to be submitted to the House, so that Parliament had some control over the patronage of Ministers. (A voice: How about Maxwell?) He did not know what was meant by " How about Maxwell ? " The Government proceeded so as to place the Civil bervice upon a commercial oasis, and persons from the Home country would not be placed over the heads of those already in tw service. He would put .'before them the estimates in relation to retrenchment. ■ It lmd been said, " Why did the Govern-

nient not resign when defeated instead ol putting the country to the expense of a second session ? He would reply that even before Parliament met it had been decided by the Opposition not to support any of ths proposals of the Government, anil that cue was followed. The expense of a second session was due to the Oppo sition refusing to consider the estimates of the Government. The Opposition could have opposed what they thought extravagant if honest in the way of retrenchment. But they went to the House determined to consider no proposals made by the Government, and to go to the country if they had a majority. Did the Opposition have a poliey to bring down ? No, and it was the duty of the Government not to be afraid to go to the country. The Government accepted the challenge to go to the country, and to submit to the country all the issues in the Financial Statement. The Government proposed reductions on a gradnated scale, commencing by taking off 74 per cent, from Ministers' salaries, and going down to all incomes not below £150. They did not knock off 10 per cent, from wages men, as had been done before, when every postmaster, even if be only got £5 a year, had a tenth of it taken off. The Government showed how a saving of about £20,000 a year could be made, but the Opposition said the proposed reductions was an unfair income tax upon oivil servants. Now some of them said the reduction was not enough— did they want a more unfair income tax ? A bid was made by the Opposition for the support of the civil servants, but he said " If we have scourged the civil servants with whips those who come after us will scourge them with scorpions." Compared with the estimates for 1886-87 the_ Government showed reductions amounting to £132,266, and no paper conld deny that in face of the appropiations for 1887 if the editors could pass the fourth standard. (Great applause.) It had been said that the supposed savings weie illusory. One member said " You have struck out the item for census returns and call it a saving, as if the census had to be ■ taken every year," but he (the speaker) was willing to knock off non-recurrent items, and then there would be a saving of £85,000. At all events, supposing that the items objected to were not savings, and there was no virtue in striking them off, it followed that there was no vice in putting them on. Therefore, if there was any extra expenditure in 1887, the Government could not be blamed, because the non-recurrent items only arose in the administrative functions of the Government. It had been said, j " Oh, the Premier says he sees his way to save £100,000 a year, bnt why did ho not propose that while the House was in session ?" He would tell them why. If the party conld not carry a reduction of £20,000, what hope could they have of carrying a larger reduction with a majority against them ? But what he said about that saving of £100,000 was this : He said if the country were content to do without without some services now performed, and if the country would ask the Government to do less for them tkan was done at present, they could make the reductions. He would set their arithmetical faculties at work by contrasting the estimates for 1883-84 wtth those for 1887-88. He would not take the expenditure of 18S3-84, because that would be an unfair comparison, because sometimes there were large savings made on the appropriations, and if a Government were careful they would not expend all the votes, so he would compare the estimates themselves. The population of the colony had increased by 60,000 since 1884, and increased population meant heavier expenditure. Of course there had been increased revenue also, but if he could show that according to the estimates large savings had been made, in spite of the increase in the population, he could » _ honestly and fairly take credit for a due 1h vegard for thrift and economy. The interest on the sinking fund had inereased by £197,000, and expenditure tffider special Acts £11,000. To allow harbors at SVestport and Greymonth to be constructed £19,000 had been' granted out of railway revenue, and the sub- ' sidies to local bodies had been increased by £55,000, which helped to reduce local taxation. The grant to the New Plymouth harbor was not worth speaking about, it was so small. They had increased the education vote £65,000, mines £6540, railways £112,886. The expenditure of the departments except post-office and telegraphs had decreased. The defence expenditure decreased £20,000, Native Dcpartment£sooo, Colonial Secretary's Department £21,000, Department of Justice £10,000, and so on. There was an actual decrease of £63,000, and how could that have been carried out if the Government had not been economical ? In addition there was a saving of £21,000 under the heads of property tax " and miscellaneous. There had been an increase of £23,000 in the Postal Department, but a corresponding increase in the revenue. So large had been the increase in the work of that department that they •might wonder how it had been conducted so cheaply, but all the additional work had been done at an increased expendiof only £23,000. Before he discussed the proposals of the Opposition he would say that the electors had three things to consider, irrespective of the question of retrenchment. Those were the Government's proposed modes of taxation, its land poiicv, and education. The newspapers sai<J that the Government proposed to largely increase the taxation of the colony. Something was said in that night's Telegraph about £156,000 additional Customs duties, but if all the increases proposed by the Government had been allowed by the House there would still have been £56,000 less reveuue fiom Customs than in 1882, the Customs revenue for that year being £1,515,917, and that proposed by the Government £1,460,000. How, then, was it, that men who were honest and truthful in all other walks of life could say when opposing the Government that they tried to increase the Customs duties? The Government only restored what had previously been paid, and he defied any newspaper to prove to the contrary. The only wanted through the £2 6s per head of the people, or less than for 20 years previously, leaving out the last financial year. In obtaining increased revenue throngh the Customs the Government tried to promote local industries. That night's paper printed an extract from the New Zealand Herald, which took itfrom Mr Mackenzie's speech, containing an extract from a pamphlet he (Sir Robert Stout) had published 16 years ago, in favor of I'ieetrade. It was like the song about Jack Robinson —(A voice : Never mind the Jack Rp.bjnson, read the extract) — who said that somebody had told him what somelindy else had heard that somebody else had said. The fact was that in that pamphlet lie pointed out the fallacies of Utopian, such as Socialism, Communism — (A voice; Read the extract)— and on the lost two pages of that pamphlet he said he did not think any of those schemes were asund. After he wrote it he spent no less than two years at a university studying political science, and he was not ashamed to say that that h.vd changed his mind. Ih 1880, in a speech at Dunedin, lie sketched out how the State should deal with local industries, so that newspapers ought to be ashamed to hint that he suddenly changed for electioneering purposes. 'The question was whether the electors approved what was advocated now. He admitted at once that the State should be exceedingly careful liow it meddled with trade, but the State was bound to aid the colonists. The railways were being run at a loss, carrying farmers' produce at rates that wonldj. not pay interest, and that was assisting local industries. Giving aid to the sick and poor was also Protection, just the flame as aid given to local industries, and if the State was not to confine itself to mere police duty the policy of aiding local industries through the tariff was justifiable. Some people said that if duties were put on the cost of goods to theconsumerwasincreased. (Hear, hear.) He would show them that that was wrong. He would start with candles. Some years ago an estimable young man went to the university, and studied chemistry, and then went to Europe and studied, and learned about stearine, and so forth. Then he came to tiie colony again, the Protection to the candle industry being then Hd per Ib. That young man said that without that duty he would not be to invest his capital in the colony, "Wma^he would not be able to invest his acquired learning and skill in the colony, but with that duty he would be able to exist and get a return for his money. When he started to make candles the price was rarely below 8d per lb for the very best, although common ones were cheaper. He produced good candles, but the merchants would not buy anything that did not have a large French label on. What did the young man do? He said "Very well, if they won't sell without a French label they shall have one," and put round his candles a label with nnprononnceable big French words upon it, and then he was able to sell. Second-class candjes could now be obtained at about 3£d or 4d per S>, the price being reduced through competition with other factories, and the imported article was driven out of the market. That was an example ol how putting on a tax lowered the cost ol goods ta the consumer. Blasting powdei was another example. A man said " 1 car invest some capital and make blastinj powder if a fix is put on importci powder, 7 He had not got his factory started, and had not yet proved he conk produce powder, when the importers said "Oh, this will cut out our blastin) powder." They wrote to the Englisl makers and said, " You must reduce tli price of your blasting powder." Th price at once came down, another ex ample. Then there was tweed cloth Tweeds had enormously lowered in price so much so that certain qualities con! not be imported from England, and th

makers actually had to export tweeds. But for the tax put upon imported tweeds not one of the tweed factories would have been started. Why should not llawke's Bay have tweed factories aud local industries? What were their young men to look forward to in life, for they could not have skilled workmanship without local industries ? Duties did not full upon the consumer, and it was their duty to their children to cautiously aid the startins: of local industries. The great countries of Europe were those which did not depend upon one industry : alone, and exporting wool and grain could not make a country great. It was therefore important in getting additional | revenue from the Customs to encourage local industries. The doctrine of the extreme Freetrader was that people should hnv in the cheapest market. If that doctrine was true, labor should be bought m the cheapest market, and if that was so what right had the colony to object to Chinese labor? The Freetraders of Canterbury were consistent, for they were proposing to import Kaffir shearers. Why was a poll tax to he placed upon Chinese if labor should be bought in the cheapest market? But the poll tax was put on to preserve the European race. (Applause.) Before dealing with the Opposition programme he would come to the "Three D's." It had been said by an eminent Belgian economist that democracy was on its trial. Three tilings were necessary to democratic government — distribution of property, distribution of land, and diffusion of education among all. How had the Government attempted to meet this ? It was not possible for any Government to say " There shall not he any rich," because there must always be differences of wealth so long as men were physically, mentally, and morally different. All men could not be on a level— (A voice : Where would you be if they were ?)— but it was the dnty of the Government as far as possible to encourage the distribution of property, and not encourage it to remain in few hands. The Government said the property tax should be increased if the Customs taxes were increased, He proposed that up to £2500 there should be no increase, the tax being thirteen sixteenths of a penny, but over that there should be no exemptions, and the tax be one penny. The two ihings most fought against in the lobbies of the House— not in Hansard ! — were the graduated tax and the Land Acquisition Bill. Bismarck and I Joseph Chamberlain favored a graduated tax, and they could not be called revolutionary. In England incomes below £140paid no'incometax. Thatwonlrtmean that any man who had only £2000 worth of property would pay no tax at all, but in New Zealand we were taxed down to £500. Rich men and rich companies had been benefited by the public works policy, and it was only fair that they should pay more under a graduated tax. The Government proposed to accomplish the dispersion of land in three ways— first by the village settlement scheme. They said to a man "You may have up to u0 acres of land, you shall have £20 given yon to help build a house for yourself and family, and if the land is bush land you may have up to £2 per acre for clearing your land. We will assist yon to make roads, and during the first and second years you will be able to get work at road-making." It was a crying shame that laboring men on farms and runs did not have a home of their own, and so they had to go into the towns and pay high rents. The Government wovtld only charge the village settlers 5 per cent, for the money advanced. The result had been that f& Auckland and Dunedin there were no unemployed. The papers said that the scheme had involved nearly £70,000 of unauthorised expenditure, hut since the 31st of March, 18S7, only £3000 had been expended. They asked for a vote of £5000 and did not expend quite £3000. The £70,000 was made up in this way. If the village settlers asked for advanees they would get them, but if they did not the money would not be expended. The House knew from the scheme as laid on the table that voting £5000 would involve the £70,000 it the settlers went on the land. So far from condemning the scheme the House sanctioned the putting 150/more families on the land, and that would mean an expenditure of £9000 more. And what was this terrible Land Acquisition Bill that ■was denonnced by the Press of the colony ? It meant that in districts where there were no Crown lands, the State should step in and take possession of large properties for the settlement of the people. (Applause.) No matter what Government got into power, if the settlers did their duty they would insist that these lands should be settled by the people. The bill did not allow land to be taken from private holders unless an association of at least 20 people asked for it, and were prepared with one-fourth of the cost, to prove themselves hona fide. settlers. The blocks would be of 100 acres, and the officers of the Crown lands department would have to report that the land was fit for settlement and that the applicants would make good use of it, and an independent tribunal would have 'to fix the price to be paid. Those who took up the' land would never be able to transfer it, it was to be a perpetual lease, and the one-fourth of the price paid down would be returned if those who paid it made improvements on the land. The Native Land Acquisition Bill provided that if a native wished to sell land he must do so through a Government officer, and no maH hereafter would be able to get native lands simply because he had money and could get Pakeha-Maoris and interpreters at his Gaok. (Great applause. ) He would' now trace the policy of the Opposition. They objected to a reduction of £20,000, but they now had Mr Bryce saying that reduction should begin at the highest and go down very low. To see what that phrase "very low" meant they would have to go to an Opposition paper, the New Zealand Times. That journal said that the Government were to blame for not reducing the wages of railway laborers. The New Zealand Times also said that no man should get more than 5s or 6s a day, whether he were skilled or unskilled, and that would interpret what Mr Bryee meant by going "very low." (These assertions caused loud cries of " Bead the article, " Produce the Times and read it," " The 'limes never said such things," and similar cries.) He could not read the article because he had not got it with him, but they would no doubt find the paper in their local Athen;eum. (A voice : What's the date of the paper ?) He did not know the date, but the article appeared on either the Tuesday or Wednesday before he went to Auckland. He might say that the Opposition journals said that the Government were to blame for the railways not paying better because they did not reduce wages, and that taken with what Mr Bryce had said would justify the speaker's statements. The New Zealand Herald, another Opposition journal, was also saying that the wages must come down. The policy of the Government was not to reduce wages below £150, but the policy of the Opposition was to reduce wages without looking to the circumstances of the men and their families, and the Opposition asked people to vote for a policy that would reduce the wages of laboring men. If his hearers wanted to keep up the name of the colony, to attract immigrants and capital, they must keep the standard of living high, and that could uot be done if the Government reduced wages that were already too low. And what did Mr Bryce say about Customs duties? Ho said that the duties must be increased. The Chambers of Commerce also said that there must be an increase, but they wanted the tax on tea and sugar, which would be paid by working people. The Government increased the ad valorem duties from 15 per cent, to 20 per cent. That meant taxing silks, satins, and laces that were only used by rich people, and the working man and the small farmer were spared. The Opposition said that the finery of the rich must not be taxed, but that they must come down on the small farmer and laborer. The Opposition desired to do away with the property tax exemption, so that if a poor widow was left with only £500 she would be taxed. The Government land scheme gave hope to the laborers, but if the Opposition scheme were to ho carried out the large landholders would be left jn charge of their monopolies, apd there would be no village settlement for those who bad no money. (Great cheering.) He had already told them what the New Zealand Times had said in favor of cutting down wages, but they should read what it said about education. It proposed that the school age should be raised from live to seven years, and that £100,000 should be saved by knocking off standards 5 and (i. He had been nine years engaged in teaching, and had studied the question in all countries about which he could obtain information, and he could say that there was a grc'at deal of misconception about the New Zealand education system. It was the cheapest of any in the Australasian colonies, the relative cost per head, including buildings, being as follows : — Tasmania, £8 5s 4*d ; New South Wales, £6 4s ; Queensland, £0* ; Victoria, £5 9s s»d : South Australia, £5 0s sid ; New Zealand, £5 2s 4\ii. The number of children above the fourth standard had increased from 97 per cent, in 1881 to 121 per cait. in 1886. Three-fifths of the school's in New Zealand had only single teachers, and the average salary p»jd to teachers was £20 lower than was paid in New South Wales and Victoria, and was a little lower than was paid in Queensland, being £90 a year, reckoning assistant teachers ana pupil teachers. If they knocked off what had been suggested they would have to shut many schools in the country districts, and settlers who were anbdninc the wilderness would have the still further disadvantage ef their children being denied education, or else inferior teachers would have to be employed. Even now many persons e were teaching who were not certifi-

cated, and who should not he engaged in teaching, but other* could not be obtained. In Otago, whore there had been State-aided high schools and colleges for many years, only four out of all tliu teachers were uncertilicated. The Opposition proposed that the people should have no higher education, but highereducalion was more important to the poor than to the rich. Tins rich conld send their children to other districts, or the other colonies, or to England, but what could a poor man do if there were not a high s«hool in his district? The poor man's child would have no chance in life. One of the defects in the Napier high school was that it did not have a sufficient number of free scholars. New Zealand ought to carry out the ideal education spoken of by Alctor Hugo, by which a pupil was to start at the village school, mount up even to the College of France, and the doors of all institutions should be open to him without fee or reward. The doors of high schools ought to be open to all who uould spare the time, and they should get the best education the colony could afford. In Otago they had those provisions, and no doubt the directors of the Napier high schools would grant the same privileges if they had more funds. Scholarships were competed for in Otago, of from £30 to £40 in the country and £20 in the town, and it was also provided that a boy or girl who got a certain number of marks could have higher education free. The result was that one-third of the Otago high school pupils had free education, and three-fourths of that number were pupils whose parents were not wealthy, and who but for high schools would have no higher education. He was glad to see that the Napier high school could boast that, one of its boys had won the Gilchrist scholarship, which he could not have done but for a high school education. He was glad that young Spencer had done this, but why should not any boy whose parents could afford to keep him from work have a chance of obtaining the highest education in the land. The fifth and sixth standards were not high enough. Even in Scotland, a poor country, more than half the schools sent up pupils in subjects far before those of the sixth standard. He came from the very poorest part of Scotland, and in his parish they were not content with the sixth standard. And they had no Government aid either, but the fees were paid by the poor people. Three-fourths of them tvere so poor that the} r were never able to have wheaten bread, yet they gave their sons and daughters good educations, and in the parish schools teachers could not obtain positions unless they could teach mathematics and languages. IFe (Sir Robert Stout) got his education in a parish school, and the boys went forth from them able to fight the battle of life because of education. The education system of the colony was a grand one, and must not be interfered with unless it could be improved by giving even higher education, and making all the high schools free. In Boston the common schools, the Latin schoids, the high schools, and the colleges were free to all, the cost being defrayed by a school ax on the citizens ; and that was why Boston was the centre of literary, scientific, and political activity. Boston had not much more than half the population of New Zealand, and yet it raised a quarter of a million more a year for education than we did. Technical education should be increased in New Zealand. Why should we he dependent upon England or Australia ? More money should be spent upon technical education. As Professor Huxley said at a meeting at the Mansion Hovtsu this year, there was a battle raging all over Europe, not with guns and swords, but an industrial fight, and that nation would be the conqueror whose sons were the best educated. Sir Robert then instanced Prussia's example as one to be followed, narrating how, after the Seven Years' War, when the people were dying for want of food, Frederick the Great promulgated a law making education compulsory on all children from five to thirteen years of age. Then, in the time of William 111., when the French defeated Prussia, and laid it under an indemnity so heavy that the women had to give np their gold and silver ornaments, the King said, " Prussia has lost in external might and glory— she must make up for it in internal might and glory," and he founded a university. The result of that noble policy was seen in the defeats which Prussia had since inflicted on Austria and Fiance. Scotland was another example of a nation which, in the midst of the poorest national surroundings, had become great and wealthy through the possession of superior facilities for education. He appealed to his hearers, if they had any regard to the future of their nation and their children, to refuse to listen for one moment to any proposal to prevent their children getting a good education. He did not cars much ■which side won in the coming elections, so long as the voice of the people was strong to say that the education system should be maintained no matter what happened. The Premier concluded by saying that on the coming content a great deal of the future of New Zealand depended. Was there to be a policy of hope and faith in the future, looking forward to the time when New Zealand would go progressively onwards, or a policy of despair, under which they would sit cowerin™ in depression. There was no unit, however small and insignificant, who had not some influence on the fntnre. This was no play-time, but a time of great responsibility, lie had a love for this colony, which was the home of himself and of his children, and he did believe that if all were actuated by the desire to help the colony forward they would do it, and future generations would say they did their duty nobly and well. The following questions were asked and answered : — Was Sir Robert Stout in favor of a tax of 2A per cent, upon the takings of totalisators^ and a (id stamp on every totalisator ticket ? — He was not in favor of either proposal, as it would tend to encourage gambling. AVould he explain under what Act a local body could compound a felony? — —Was not aware of the existence of any such Act. Was it true that Mr Maxwell was getting six months' leave of absence on full pay and a gift of £150 in addition. —Mr Maxwell was entitled to six months' holiday under the Civil Service regulations, which allowed each civil servant a month each year. Mr Maxwell had not taken his holidays, and was taking six at once. The £150 was not pocket money, as Mr Maxwell would attend a railway conference at Milan, and he might get sonic useful hints on railway management. Would Sir Robert Stout tell the meeting how many thousands of pounds he had earned by private practice as a solicitor while costing the country £2400 a year as Premier? — What he earned was his own business. Unless the Government of the country were to be left to rich men it would not be right to stop a lawyer's private practice when he became a Minister. Was it true that he had spoken ;!gainst colonial politicians accepting titles, and had he ever been in favor of an Act being passeil to prevent titles being accepted ? If yes, how did lie reconcile Uis utterances with accepting a title himself? — lie had only spoken against hereditary titles. As for him ever suggesting legislation to prevent the acceptance of titles the idea was absurd, ns such an Act would meaH separation from Great Britain. Did he believe that it a man were appointed Attorney - General and was paid to be so, that he should be allowed to practise in the Courts privately ? If so, should not he cease to be paid by the State for the time lie derotes to private business? — The idea that an AttorneyGeneral should not be allowed private practice was nonsense, and it was absurd to suppose that his pay as a public officer should cease while he was engaged in private business. In some countries Attornies-General got special fees for conducting Government cases, How did Sir Robert Stout rcconoile his solicitude for working people with putting £110,000 of taxation upon aalieoes, prints, and brown hollands, used solely by the working classes, and admitted free by every Government but Sir Robert Stout's "Liberal" one? — The person who asked the question was incerrect, the salary of the Premier being only £1750. He (Sir Robert Stout) had to learn that brown holland was peculiar to working people. He would not say that every item of the tariff could be supported, but the Government did what they thought the best. Working people could jiot expect to escape taxation. No previous Government had ever taxed calicoec, prints, and hollands, and Sir Robert Stout had said that the tariff was arranged to protect local industries, was the putting on of £110,000 of taxation on the articles named done to protect local industries?— lt was not. Was he in favor of abolishing State assistance to high schools, and handing over the hig.h school reserves for the benefit of tin: primary schools ?— He was not. Did he ever say that the Government could not alford to pay more than 4s a day to laboring men, and if yes did he think Hie colony could aH'ord to pay for his services at the rate of £2400. a year ? — The person who asked the question must have been reading the Trfeyraph. What he had said was that the unemployed of Chrlstohurch could not be paid more than 4s a day. If the Government lequired men to 'work they should be paid ordinary wage*?. Was Sir Robert Stout going to stand for any other constituency than the Dunedin one he bad declared for?— He was not. Did he ever write a pamphlet in which it was stated that Protection was legalised robbery? — When he wrote that ho was adopting the views of other men on • political economy.

Did lie write a pamphlet on education, in which it was stated that State education would be ;i violation of the bouial compact, iiuil unjust.— Ho wrote that in lSfi.i, and it was correct if they adopted Herbert fJpcncer's opinion that the State .should only protect life and property— to ko a police-ocmcy— (liafc view was right. But, it that liu.itiUioii of State duties wan abrogated ;>,^i-; uin; to education was right. Mr IJuMiiond : I," the vl, L .q,.f ;l niier.-i in >.ew ZeiiUml dwidi' t.> import Knfh'r labor, will you assist in placing a poll-tax on them ?— I am in favor of that. Will you snppnit manhood suffrage ns applied to local government?— l do not see how you could allow manhood suffrage in elections to purely rating bodies. Only tho.se who pay rules should have a vote, as these local bodies have the power to rai^o loans. I have no objection to manhood suffrage in the election of Mayors or chairmen of County Councils, As Minister for Education can you do anything towards extending the benefits of the education system to Maori children, so that they should not become the victims of fanaticism and land -speculators ? — lam glad to say that we are doing all we can in that direction. Are you aware that the decisions of the Supreme Court in this district, more especially in Maori land cases, are regarded with universal disapprobation and suspicion, and will you change the oircuit of the present Chief Justice, Sir .fames Prendergast »— I am very much surprised at such a question, and such an imputation. The decisions of our Supreme Court Judges are right and able. OutBench is as unbiassed and unprejudiced as any country enjoys. (Applause). Mr Jacobsen moved, " That this meeting desires to convey to Sir Robert Stout its hearty thanks for the instructive and admirable address which he has just delivered, and desires to assure him that those present entertain the fullest confidence in himself and Government." Mr Townshend seconded the motion, which was put by the chairman, and a great many hands were held up for it, and none in opposition. It was therefore declared amidst applause to be carried unanimously. In response to cries of "Ivess" j\hIvess stepped forward, and in a short speech expressed his confidence in the present Ministry, saying that the "unscrupulous tactics of the Tory Press of Napier made his blood boil."