COLERIDGE DISTRICT.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 3569, 26 June 1872, Page 3

COLERIDGE DISTRICT.

A meeting of the electors, convened bv Mr Jebson, was held in the Kowai Pass schoolroom on Monday eyening lost. The schoolroom was crowded. Mr Thomas Wallace was elected chairman of the meeting.

The Chaikman remarked that as all the three candidates wore present, ho would not occupy the time of the meeting with any remarks, beyond hoping they would give all the speakers a fair hearing, as they had always done at any former meeting ho had attended in. the district. He would now call upon Mr Jebson, who had called the meeting, to address them.

Mr Jebson said—As many of those present had no doubt read the report of the meeting held at Hororata on Monday last, he did not propose to enter into the various important subjects contained in his address, but would briefly refer to them. Ho, Mr Jebson had gone out of his usual course and written a speech, a thing he had never done before, he would endeavour to avoid being tedious, as he was aware of the difference between reading and speaking to an audience. With reference to the public works policy before the country, I should be prepared to give it my unqualified support, and I am satisfied that the FoxVogel Government are entitled to the gratitude of the country for the manner in which they have so far carried out the same. There is nothing to be deprecated more than to retard in any way the development of the country’s resources. The depression and gloom that lias existed for some time is being gradually removed, and any retrograde movement would bo ominous. Besides, who of all the statesmen in New Zealand have hitherto shown any aptitude to design and execute works on the scale and of the character proposed in the scheme so universally approved. It was confidentlypredicted that failure was certain, because it would be impossible to provide the capital to carry out the proposed works. That difficulty being overcome, the country is now going to ruin owing to the amounts proposed to be expended in the aggregate, and further because so large an amount is being absorbed for preliminary expenses. The whole amount under this latter head will be far less than the amount required to pass a single bill authorising the construction of a railway in England through the House of Commons. There is no doubt many of the projected railways in Now Zealand will not be remunerative it made for years to come; on that account the Government will require to hold the reins with a firm hand to prevent an extravagant expenditure on unproductive works. The bridging of rivers and making of roads in all parts of the country will be required, also population, t* render the Public Works scheme successful. Then we may be assured that a project so universally accepted by those most interested, the psople of New Zealand, endorsed by the Home Government, believed in and contributed to by the capitalists of England, requires only to be carefully administered to ensure a prosperous future for New Zealand. Should you elect me, all ray energies would be employed to secure this result. My opponents certainly deserve great credit for the views they entertain. Mr Hart would be perfectly willing to support any good measures brought forward by these men, but he did not believe in the men themselves. What he would like to see was, that any member going mto the House should go in to strengthen the hands of the Government, because they were not sufficiently strong; on these grounds I claim Mr Hart’s support. The measures adopted by the Government in native affairs appear to have been so far eminently satisfactory, and only by a continuance of conciliatory measures and opening up the country by roads and keeping the natives as far as possible employed in the North Island, and settling a white population in those parts of the country that have hitherto been inaccessible to Europeans, can we reasonably expect a peaceful solution of the native difficulty. As regards the postal service between this country and America, I think there is every prospect of its being a success. The projectors could not control the ..elements, neither can the most prudent foresee all the contingencies that are likely to arise in so great an undertaking. Although there has been a little irregularity in the service and inconvenience, yet there is a prospect that this will be remedied in the future. And the sendee having received the favourable consideration of the American Government, besides material aid, we may conclude that it will be mutually advantageous to both countries; we have ample proof already that such is likely to be the case. Gentlemen, you will see in the newspapers that I am reported as having stated at the meeting at Hororata that £500,000 were taken in a lump sum for the tunnel ; what I stated was that £50,000 had been taken, also £300,000 or £IOO,OOO for the West Coast road. Oh, oh, from the chairman, which implied dissent, or questioned the truth of that statement. The Hon. John Hall, who was chairman at that meeting, was Secretary for Public Works at the time that road was made, and he ought to have been correctly informed on the subject. Wbat are the facts P The gross amount that the Provincial Government of Canterbury spent is £357,030 7s 2d; Westland pays for interest and sinking fund annually £13,003 Is 8d ; so that £107,630 7s 2d has been diverted from the current resources of the province for these two works. I should support any well considered proposal for selling the waste lands of Canterbury on deferred payments, A short bill brought into the General Assembly last session by Mr Brown was agreed to by a large majority, and the principle has been affirmed by the Provincial Council, yet, gentlemen, my opponents, the other candidates, are opposed to any change. As to Mr Hart, I am not surprised at this in his speech at Hororata : “ He must say that he was certainly opposed to the sale of waste Linds on deferred payments ; sooner than see the deferred payment system introduced here, he would prefer giving grants of land to those who paid their own passages.” Mr Bluett, on the same subject, says : “Mr Brown’s bill would not receive his support, and then adds, he was not personally opposed to the system of deferred payments. ’ 1! would ask—Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots ? if so, then I could reasonably expect Mr Hart to support a a proposal for this change. Mr Hart is a squatter of the first water. He considers that, because I seconded his nomination at the last election, our views are very similar. Yet we differ ou many essential points, and here I would ask Mr Hart if he would have contested the seat for Coleridge at the last election if Mr Wilson had not retired. I would further ask Mr Hart if he would have come forward to contest this election if Mr Wilson had come forward; and further, if Mr Wilson was now to com* forward, would Mr Hart continue the contest. I conclude Mr Hart is only Mr Wilson modified, and on that ground I am not surprised that Mr Hart is opposed to the sale of waste binds on deferred payments. I will, with the permission of the meeting, read an extract from a letter published in the Home News of January last, supposed to be written by Anthony Trollope, Esq.: “ The squatter, or wool-grower, is indeed the aristocrat, not only of Queensland, but of all Australia. The squatting interest is always the aristocratic interest. There is in every Legislative Council a large section of squatting members, and in society the wives of squatters arc the countesses and duchesses of the land. There is no one on whom ho looks down from so great a height or with so supreme a contempt ns on the free selector or farmer, the man who in conformity with some odious democratic law has come upon an infinitesimal portion of the great pastoral lord’s run, and bought or free selected his corner for himself.” Now, gentlemen, this is from an educated observer, and there is much more to the same effect, especially the system of “ dummying, _ described " as an interesting mode of driving a coach and horses through an Act of 1 arliament.” Do the squatters in New Zealand differ at all from their brethren in Q ueensland, or are our Acts of Parliament less elastic or open F I leave you to answer, and I am sure you will not be surprised that Mr Hart is opposed to change, nor at the reasons advanced by him against any change. The land laws of Canterbury are said to be its glory, and are said to have worked well and satisfactorily. Tho deferred payment system has been tried in other places and faded. Then is it not

possible by the proposed change that the land laws in Canterbury will become more glorious? If to give increased facilities for selling tho west* lands ; to place more people on tho lands to more profitably occupy the said lauds; to derive a larger permanent revenue from tho lands; to prevent the alienation of tho same ; to assist tho really deserving to provide a safe investment ; to encourage thrifty habits to secure tho safety of the State, and diffuse the taxation of tho country over a larger area, is not more glorious, I don’t know what is. As to the well working and satisfaction, there has been for years murmurs of discontent, and they arc becoming louder every day, Laws may bo good in themselves, and bo very indifferently administered, and as purchasers have to go further from centres of population, an inducement ought to be hold out to them, and the trammels of imaginary pre-emptive rights removed. As to the failure of the deferred payment system where it has been tried, the diversity of opinion is so great on this head the impartial observer will decide that tho weight of evidence is against this conclusion. Another statement of the writer before-named in the Home News is as follows “ The Queensland farmer is almost invariably a struggling man with small means, &c., &c.” The farmer, however, who is, as I have before said, a poor i struggling man, is always a freeholder in prospectu, one who has bought his land and is paying for it by instalments to the Crown. There is nothing here about failure in Queensland. This ought to satisfy Mr Bluett, who is the poor farmer’s friend, but who could not come forward to contest this election without Mr Wilson’s consent. Mr Bluett advocates tho sale of waste lands at reduced prices on spine principle of classification not yet defined, or to allow the waste lands to be sold on deferred payments in large blocks of 610 acres. Now this is from the farmers’ friend. I would ask what class of farmers is Mr Bluett the friend of. The poor farmer or the rich farmer ? Mr Bluett is certainly a buyer of grain, so is Mr Wood, a' gentleman Largely interested in this district, so also is Mr Lane, another elector of the district ; they buy ou their own account; does Mr Bluett, or is he only on agent, buying on commission in the cheapest market ? I am at a loss to know what advantages the fanners of this district, or tho countiy, have derived from the rev. gentleman’s friendship, and how he proposes that his friendship will in any way advance their material interests. Such a motto, gentlemen, was never inscribed on the banner of any candidate for Parliamentary honours before, aud advocated with such views. Gentlemen tell them it won’t take. Your member should be the friend of all interests, and the enemy to none as is implied in this designation. This assumption is no doubt patriotic. Patriotism, as some define it, is the love of country, and the extent of my opponent’s love of country is, in Mr Hart’s case, runs of many thousand acres, and in Mr Bluett’s blocks of 640 acres or more,; their love is confined to the country, and the fewer inhabitants the better. But, gentlemen, the love of country is only the source from which it takes its rise. Patriotism is the highest virtue which can be ascribed to the citizen; it dwells with generous and heroic minds ; it leads to the conception and the execution of magnanimous deeds, and it throws a grandeur around the character of the individual with which nothing besides can invest it. Gentlemen, the man that loves his species does not wish to circumscribe their limits. The waste lands of Canterbury were intended for the people; they are the people’s portion, and the men who strive to remove all restrictions out of the way, that the people may possess their heritage, are tho farmers’ friends, and none else. Where is the evidence that this noble principle exists in the hearts of my opponents ? Tho contrary is self-evident; they seek to keep the poor man poor by refusing to allow bim a few years to pay for his holding, the principal £2 per acre being maintained intact, and it is conceded no injustice can be done to either the squatter, the capitalist, or the freeholder. I cannot conclude this question better than by reading an extract from a letter 1 received the other day. The writer says “ when I went up-country first I was saving a few pounds on a station, at the end of 12 months I had about £ 10 ; could I have invested that in land I should have done so, but to buy 20 acres in one place and wait a year to buy another 20 acres, perhaps not within 10 miles of the first, would be absurd, so I gave it up. Could I have bought 80 acres in one block by paying the £lO deposit, I could have worked out the remainder and the land would have been clear either to sell or to occupy. This seems to me a legitimate ambition for a working man, and should interest them iu its favour. The writer thinks very properly that this is an argument in favour of deferred payments I have overlooked. With regard to provincial institutions, they are a difficult subject, scarcely any legislative function is loft to them ; they are certainly an initiating body, but there is no real legislation they can perform. A Resident Minister and staff will no doubt shortly absorb this institution. It is at present costly and cumbersome, there is nothing but tho railways to manage, and is it possible that 39 gentlemen with Superintendent and all the provincial staff will bo retained as managers of provincial .railways under tho General Government. I cannot see how they are to be improved. I am aware it has been mooted that the General Government should baud over the money for public works, railways, &c., to the Provincial Governments to spend ; that will never be done, and were it attempted the difficulties of governing would be increased instead of lessened and simplified. This system of double government is an anomaly; the Provincial Government have the Waste Land laws to administer besides the management of the railways. It is proposed to hand over the police, gaols, and lunatic asylums to the General Government. Again I ask wbat is left for the Provincial Council to do that could not be undertaken by a Resident Minister and staff. That is an alternative I should not like to see brought about, because the provincial revenues would then find their way into the common fund; this is to bo guarded against. If the system was modified, and the Provincial Government so constituted that all the departments were centred under one head, railways, waste lands, education, &c., then Provincial institutions might become useful. They would then be a working government instead of an ornamental one. The superintendent would be the head elected by the people, divested of veto power, but as acting president would have a vote and casting vote, yet I think the time has not yet come for an organic change, and as in the interval no doubt some scheme will be matured that will meet, the case any proposed changes would receive my most careful consideration. The education question is one of groat importance, and conflicting views render it almost impracticable for any Government to deal with. The bill brought in last session was, in my opinion, a fair one, though it did not meet with universal approval. I will quote an extract from a paper read recently : —“When the state which comprises all classes of the community undertakes to apply taxation, whether by Parliamentary grant or local mto on Parliamentary authority, direct or indirect, to the purposes of religious teaching, it trespasses beyou its legitimate province, takes upon itself responsibilities which it bus not suitable qualifications to discharge, and subjects itself to the alternative of pursuing, but ineffectually pursuing, religious equality by concurrent and proportional* subsidies to all faiths or by selecting one or more from amongst many for support and favour.” I quite concur in the foregoing, and would add, let us not be frightened at the word secular, it does not represent a spectre; when I use the term, I do not use it in antagonism to religion; if I did, I should conclude religion could not exist outside denominationalism, but believing that teachers in schools may bo religious without being ultra sectarians, 1 approve of a system of education supported by the authority of the stat e that is national and not denominational. Still, I think all parties admitting the Bible to be of the highest authority I do not see what can be raised against its contents being taught in schools, leaving the purely religious part of teaching to parents, guardians, and ministers of religion. I am in favour of a Permissive Bill that would be prospective in tions, vested interests being held inviolable. If it is right for tho state to derive profit from the issue of licenses, and only to grant a

license to parties who comply with the conditions laid down, then I think the state would not bo justified in summarily taking away the license, except the conditions are violated. lam of opinion the power should be vested in the people to grant or refuse a license, whore two-thirds or three-fourths ore opposed to the same, in any district. On the question of railways—The railway to Ashburton will, no doubt, be pushed on j and, if the material and rolling stock were half the weight of the main lines constructed, tliat would bo sufllcient for many years to come. As to the Malvern railways, I have not referred to these in a former address. My political opponents, with a want of truthfulness that is surprising, have been trying to make votes by gross misrepresentations. It is assorted, without scruple or qualification, that I am, and always have been, opposed to a railway to the Sclwynj that I emphatically deny. A railway was proposed,and ordered tobe surveyed to the Selwyn, I believe, by the Hon. John Hull, when a member of the Provincial Executive. It will be remembered, at a meeting held in this room, on the subject, how innocently wo were invited to wait for the Provincial Geologists’ report. But, if Mr Hall had no idea of what the contents of the Provincial Geologist’s report would be, on what data did ho proceed to authorize the survey of a coal tramway or railway ? I did advocate the railway to Malvern, and thought it ought to have the preference ; but we were led to conclude that the railway was to be made to the Selwyn, to the utter exclusion of Malvern. It is true I looked upon this as an act of gross injustice, and furnished data that have never been controverted, to prove that a railway to Malvern would be a paying one, while the one to the Selwyn was, at least, doubtful. I was then informed that the lines were to be constructed together; but what was my surprise to find that the engineer, Mr Bray, had decided, on his own authority, for anything I know to the contrary, to make a detour in the main line, from Brett’s corner to the telegraph poles, a distance of 5 miles, then to bring the main line along the telegraph poles, till it joins the original reserve, near Little Racecourse hill. This detour makes the Malvern line near 2 miles longer than if it was brought along the original reserve, without making the Selwyn line a yard shorter. Mr Bray could give no reason for this alteration (though I could), beyond that there would be a saving of about £240 per annum for interest, while 100 tons of goods per day would be a tax in perpetuity of near £4OO per annum on the producers in the Malvern district, besides one shilling per head for passengers for every journey to Christchurch. I did protest against this injustice, in the name, and on the behalf of the residents in the Malvern district, and I am bound to say that, in my opinion, both the Railway Engineer and the Provincial Geologist have shown themselves partizaus, instead of Government officers, who are expected to act in the interests of all concerned impartially. Gentlemen, am Ito be branded with infamy for looking after your interests, when you entrusted me with them in this matter ? I should be ashamed to look you in the face, if I could be guilty of such baseness; besides, these gentlemen |would not object to have a railway, and exclude you from the same privilege. If they were making a railway with their own money, no objection could be raised. But they arc not; therefore, we ought all to be placed on the same footing. But, gentlemen, here we have not only selfishness personified, but we have an arbitrariness that would make it criminal to question the acts of interested persons. lam not made of that kind of metal to bo intimidated. I like fair play, and if I cannot succeed without such subterfuges then I must fail. There is another subject I wish to say a word upon. Some of you have heard that I am going to retire from this contest in favour of Mr Bluett, who has superior claims on you for support, and because he is a more eligible candidate. As to Mr Bluett’s claims, I don’t admit them ; as to his eligibility, I hare that to find out. One of my disqualifications is, I live in a comer of the district. Another is I am connected with coal mines ; and it is intimated that my supporters are going quietly to let me down, because they have the ballot, and and will keep up the ruse until the poll. As to ray being in the corner of the district, I have tlic advantage over my opponents because they do not live in it at all, nor has Mr Bluett an atom of interest in it. As to my connection with coal mines, surely this is my best recommendation. If the elaborate reports of the Provincial Geologist are reliable, this is to be eminently a mining district; and an elector said to me the other day, “Wo want the railways making, the mines opening, and a large population settling m the district, tliat wo may have a market for our produce.” Row, does Mr Bluett or Mr Hart possess one qualification that fits them to represent a mining district in the General Assembly, and a district containing such a variety of interests us the Coleridge district ? I think, gentlemen, you will give your answer at the proper time. As to your practising deception, the wish is father to the thought, and if anyone was capable of inducing an elector to adopt such a course, he would merit the contempt of all honourable men. Ido not believe these things, but think it right to inform you what the tactics of my opponents are, so far as the supporters of Mr Bluett are concerned. Gentlemen, I shall fight this election to the last, and use every honourable means to win it. I will tell you why. When it was first rumoured that our late member was about to resign, I wrote at once to several of what arc called the iulluential men of the district, amongst others the Hon. John Hall and the Hon. Colonel Brett, knowing that the Hon. Colonel Brett was a professed out-and-out supporter of the present Government, and also presuming that the Hon. John Hall would not have conditionally' accepted the office of Resident Minister for the Middle Island if he had not been a supporter. This is no secret. The lion. Mr Reeves stated at Lpeston that if Mr Hall’s health had not failed lie would have been in the office he (Mr Reeves) then filled. My object was to ascertain who was to be brought forward. I received no reply from either of the above named gentlemen for some time. I believe I am right in stating that Mr Hawdon was talked of as a candidate. I believe lam further right in stating that Messrs Brett, Anson, Hawdon, and others met to select a candidate, and subsequently Mr Hall joined the party. Mr Cracroft Wilson was solicited, but refused without an influential requisition was got up and presented. Mr Hart was then solicited, and also requested a requisition. Ultimately it was decided by that large and influential meeting tliat Mr Hart should be brought forward ; Mr Hawdon should retire, Mr Bluett had been named, but ho would not stand. There was only Jebson, —ho was nobody. All this I heard on good authority, before receiving any intimation in writing. Afterwimls I received a letter from the Hon. John Hall, dated April 17, informing me, “ Mr George Hart will be a candidate, and I promised him my vote; also, “ Inviting me to agree to support Mr George Hart, who appears to be acceptable to nearly' all classes of electors.” Well, gentlemen, I thought it strange that four or five electors should hawk the seat for Coleridge, find a •ustouior, and settle the election in Christchurch, without in any way consulting the 355 electors that were equally interested. Gentlemen, 1 am here to protest against such action. 1 will not bo reduced to an automaton by a few electors in the choice of a candidate. I then heard Mr Bluett had changed his mind, and was coming forward as a candidate. 1 communicated with one of a proposed deputation, telling him what would in my opinion be the effect of both of us standing us candidates. No notice was taken of that. I met Mr lUuett by appointment on the 2 tth of May to talk the mutter over. He told mo then ho would not come forward if Mr Wilson did, and Mr Wilson had told him that morning he would come forward. Mr Bluett further informed me ho- hod received no requisition. I told him, in that ease, we must each take our own course. Mr Hart was then at work, and had canvassers out. I would, gentlemen, hove submitted the matter to you at that time to avoid a split in the party—it is now too late — on the heads of those who have acted as though every faculty of miud, every atom of independence, was to be sacrificed at the shrine they have set up. I have no doubt us to the result.

Mr Jebgou was listened to with great interest and attention. The applause was frequent during the delivery of his observa-

tions, and he was loudly applauded at the con elusion. The Chairman then called on Mr Hart to address the meeting. Mr Hart observed that as Mr Bluett was the last speaker at tlmeeting at Hororata, he would give him the preference. Mr Bluett said he had been given to understand that he would bo looked upon as an interloper in that district, but lie found lie was not. Referring to various subjects that have been dwelt upon by the previous speaker and by himself at the Hororata, lie would inform them that he was a supporter of the Government, and so long as they carried out the public works policy, bridged the rivers, and made roads they would have his support. He was surprised at the audacity of Mr Jcbson—an orator—convening a meeting on his own dunghill and reading a speech, and he animadverted warmly on some of the statements Mr Jcbson had made on the question of lands on deferred payments, immigration, a board of agriculture, and agricultural college, increased wharfage accommodation in Lyttelton, inequality in rating property, th* monopoly in shipping, &c. His remarks were principally a repetition of those made at the Hororata. Mr Hart referred to Mr Jcbson’s remarks on his being a squatter. It appeared to him there were three different interests in the Coleridge district —the pastoral, the farming, and the mining interests, —and there was no necessity for them to be conflicting. He was opposed to the proposal to sell the waste lands on deferred payments. Between Mr Jebson and him, on this point, there was a difference. If the system of deferred payments had been in operation during the last sir months, during which period there had been 30,000 acres of land sold, realising £60,000, if this land had been sold on deferred payments, only £13,000 would have been realised, and what would the Road Boards have got out of that sum ? Nothing. But having realised £60,000, the Road Boards would get £15,000 or 25 per cent at once. He did not think there was any ground for complaint, against the squatters because of pre-emptive rights. There were only 50,000 acres of homestead pre-emptive rights in the province of Canterbury, and 150,000 acres of improvement pre-emptive rights ; that surely was not a large quantity out of 7,000,000 acres, and was it right that the pastoral tenant should have no security over his homestead; if that was the case, and parties being free to select land, they would select the land with the homestead upon it, not because of the value of the land, but because of improvements upon it. Mr Hart stated as it was getting late, and there would be other opportunities of addressing the electors in the district, he would not further detain the meeting. The Chairman then informed the meeting that if any elector had any questions to ask the candidates, they were at liberty to do so.

Mr Gellanders wished to know if Mr Jebson approved of the proposal to prevent all parties occupying or possessing 100 acres of land, being excluded from taking land on deferred payments. Mr Jebson replied there must be a limit somewhere, but he thought it was just to exclude those parties who might have 100 acres of land; he thought that such parties ought to have the privilege to take up land to the extent of 100 acres if they thought proper to do so, but if they elected him as their member, he would give the matter his most careful consideration.

Mr Hight asked Mr Jebson if he would support a scheme t« irrigate the plains from the Kowai.

Mr Jebson replied that he considered it was an important work, and was surprised that nothing had been done by the Government towards carrying on a work that would be so great an advantage to the district. Messrs Hart and Bluett were asked the same question, which they answered in the affirmative.

Mr Cooper asked Mr Bluett if he was elected would he go to the Assembly as a time-server to get a billet. Mr Bi/uett replied tliat he had no such intention.

Mr M'Pueuson then came forward to address the meeting. It was objected that he was not an elector. He stated that he was on an electoral roll in Westland, and could nominate himself as a candidate, and he intended to come forward to oppose Mr Jebson. He was allowed to address the meeting, and avowed himself as an opponent of Mr Vogel and the Government on the ground that a large amount of money had been spent, and no works were yet being executed.' The Hon. Colonel Brett then rose to address the meeting. He passed a high eulogium on Mr Jebson as a firm supporter of the Government. He also spoke warmly in favour of Mr Bluett, and asked the electors to vote for him. Mr Gellanders moved that Mr John Jebson is the most fit and proper person to represent the Coleridge district in the General Assembly. Mr Rutledge seconded the motion. Mr En vs moved as an amendment, “ That this meeting tender their thanks to the candidates for their attendance at the meeting.” This was seconded by Mr Cooper. The amendment was put to the meeting, and 20 voted for; same against. When it was put there was some confusion. The Chairman declared there were 18 against, others said there were 10. The amendment was declared carried.

A vote of thanks to the Chairman ended the largest and most influential meeting ever held in the district.