The Star. (PUBLISHED DAILY.)

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume IX, Issue 1711, 25 August 1887, Page 2

The Star. (PUBLISHED DAILY.)

THURSDAY, AUGUST 25, 1887. THE PEOPLE'S RESPOKSfBILITIES.

Sir William Fox, who is just now writing a aeries of letters to the Rangitikei Advocate on the present crisis, makes one remark which indicates Dot onlj bis high sense of honor in politics, but also enforces a political truth which, when stated, is so self-evident as to appear a mere truism, and yet is daily forgotten in the discussion of politics. In referring to the Public Works scheme and the borrowing, he says, "I am ]'ust as much responsible as anyone," and he proceeds to show that all who took part in directing and carrying

out that policy are responsible for its consequences. We admire the honesty which prompts an old politician to come forward in the hour of the unpopularity of a particular policy and voluntarily irake upon his sbouJders a share of the hard things being said about the author of that policy. "We want more of that spirit in our public men, and especially in the electors. One of tbe sins of the democracy is ingratitude. The electors return men pledged up to tbe eyes to carry out a particular policy, and if that policy fail little or no blame is taken to themselves by the electors, but those who have been their mouthpieces are called upon to bear the full brunt of the odium that attaches to failure. The principle of the Public Works scheme was wise and statemanlike, and notwithstanding all the outcry there now is against borrowing, we venture to say that that principle must remain an active force in our future policy. The country must be onened up, and it is justifiable to borrow for that purpose. But there is all the difference in the world between wise and unwise borrowing, between careful and careless expenditure. Tbe difference is just that which separates success and failure. Unfortunately, when the public works scheme was floated, greed, local greed — may we not say personal and private greed ?—? — eclipsed patriotism. Money was spent not to benefit the colony but to please the constituencies. Each district clamored for its " rights," though, as a matter of fact, there was never any " right " vesting in any locality. We should never have heard of the word "rights;"' the question really should have been what was likely to be

profitable and to the interest of the colony as a whole. Local rights were very trequently colonial wrongs ; but they were insisted upon. And by whom? By the people, by the electors — for the most part by the very people who are now calhwg out against extravagance and jobbery, and all the other sins which they themselves

committed aud approved of being committed in their names. The sins of the people are now coming home to them, and the people, instead of accepting their responsibility, blame politicians and mostly those to whom they happen at the present moment to be opposed. Instead ot'eowardly evading our responsibilities and unjustly casting them on those whom we forced to carry out our will, we, the people, should manfully bear our share of the blatne, and, crying mea culpa, make up our minds to be more prudent in the future. As a country we have lived riotously ; as a country we are now suffering the consequences. Some people as they suffer grow wiser. Will the people of New Zealand do so ? The only hope of a -successful Suture is that out of this present suffering wisdom shall arise. Parliament is, we are happy to say, truly representative — representative of the aspirations of the people, o' their desire for progress, of their weaknesses and foibles, too. As a stream does not rise higher than its source, neither does the integrity and wisdom oi Parliament and the Government rise above the integrity and wisdom of the people. This is a truism, of course ; but how many of the electors realise it when they are casting their votes into the ballot box. Every man in this country of 21 years of age and of sound mind is in a sense a governor, and by his vote he governs the country as far as he is concerned in the way in which ghe thinks it should be govern d. If his act of government is influenced by, personal motives or swayed by party passion, can he expect good government, or has he a right to complain of bad government and its consequences — above all, has he auy right in after years to blame others for the effects of a policy which he, to the utmost of his power j assisted, to cauy outs'