The Lyttelton Times. THURSDAY, DEC. 2, 1875.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XLIV, Issue 4618, 2 December 1875, Page 2

The Lyttelton Times. THURSDAY, DEC. 2, 1875.

The speech of Mr B. 0. J. Steveas in the Oddfellows’Hall on Monday evening is remarkable, not so much for any freshness of argument, material, or suggestion, as for the fearlessness, nonchalance, and scorn of all logic with which it is permeated. The two bases upon which the speech is propped are two pictures that have certainly been drawn often of late, and indeed cannot be drawn too often, but have never been brought into such close proximity by any of the Centralist party before. The pictures are those of the faulty Provincial Government and of the vicious Colonial Government, In the earlier part of his speech', Mr Stevens descanted with considerable vigour and reality of feeling on the mischief the present Provincial Executive has wrought in Canterbury; its unfairness to the Municipality; its peddling for twopences in school-fees ; its abolition of the Board of Education; and its establishment of “what they “ call a Minister of Education.” There are few in Canterbury who would not acknowledge the truth of the picture. Indeed, Mr Stevens was exceedingly moderate in the use of the colours he had ready to hand. He might have pictured with perfect truth the ruinous effects of its stupid Railway policy; its shortsighted cheeseparing in the higher interests of the Province; its petty tyranny over School Committees, and over other bodies within its influence ; and, above all, its mulish obstinacy. He might have read, with powerful effect, the paragraphs in the news columns the other day concerning the bell-ringing and flag-flying at Prebbleton, over the long-fought-for concession of a few more feet of schoolroom. But he held his hand, perhaps more from want of time than from want of will. On the other hand, in the latter half

of his speech he painted the Colonial Government as it is and has been. He showed how they broke faith with the Country, broke faith with the House, broke their own word, squandered the public revenue, neglected public business, pandered to local and personal feelings, made market of public necessities, mismanaged public interests, were guided by private favouritism ; in fact, were steeped in jobbery, and burked all discussion of that jobbery. He relentlessly anatomised the Piako Swamp job, and the disregard of the House’s orders in the San Francisco Contract, and threw aside all the explanations of these as mere pretences. He showed their ignorance of the most elementary principles of political economy in their Polynesian scheme, their barrenness of even the shreds of honour in various parts of their administration, their heedlessness of consistency in legislation, and their want of intelligence in the use of political material. He cited, just to exemplify the last two points, how in one breath they declared a large surplus, and yet laid on a tax on mortgages ; how in the last change of tariff they taxed the Country, when they themselves declared that there was no need for it; how,when they wished to do justice to the lodger they could not manage it without the clumsy application of manhood suffrage. We have never heard the Central Government so scarified—not even by Sir George Grey, to whose opposition to the Government and their plans Mr Stevens sneeringly alluded. Yet Mr Stevens refers to these as only their “ minor offences,” and in declaring that he would confine himself to the more recent shortcomings of the Central Government, hints that there is store of complaints to be found in the past.

The natural conclusion from these two . pictures it is easy for any but one who has “ been an Abolitionist for many years,” to draw. There is nothing said, or even hinted, against the past Provincial Governments of Canterbury, except that they have put the Superintendent into •* a too anomalous position.” There is clear reference, to something unclean in the past of the Central Government. It is only against the personnel of the present Provincial Executive he fulminates. Whereas in the Central Government he finds much indeed that is personally admirable, but declares that it is against the principles on which the Central Government is conducted he complains. Referring to Mr Richardson, he says : —“ It is not the fault of “ the man who administers it, but the “ fault of the political manner in “ which the thing has been con- “ ducted.” The faults of the Provincial Government arise only from stupidity and obstinacy. The vices of the Central Government arise from jobbery and want of trustworthiness and of a sense of honour, as well as from stupidity. The fault of the former is cheeseparing; the fault of the latter is the illegitimate appropriation of the cheeseparings. • What logical conclusion can be drawn but that the Provincial Executive should be turned out and that the Central Government should be completely renovated, if not curtailed in power ? But this is not the conclusion of Mr Stevens. On the contrary, he decides that the Provincial Government be wholly swept away and the Central Government placed in the absolute throne of empire. He is not far from giving the advice, “ Kill thy physician and thy fee bestow upon the foul disease.” By parity of reasoning he would introduce the inverted social arrangements described in “ Erewbon,” and put the sick man as a criminal to death, whilst he would feed and pamper the man or body of men whom he convicts of breaches of morality. He would cast out all schoolmasters because he finds an occasional Squeers amongst them, and turn over the whole care of the young generation to the care of Fagin.

We cannot attribute to Mr Stevens sophistry or insincerity in any shape. What, then, can have been the reason of this inversion, or rather absence, of logic ? It was certainly the existence of a third picture in his mind, the pic* ture of an ideal Central Government composed of E. O. J. Stevenses, with himself as head of the Executive. This always changed places with the realistic picture he drew of the actual state of the Cental Government, whenever he wished to play the Abolitionist caird. Were all the Members of the House of j Representatives as straightforward and j aff JJr Stevens Wmself there would not be so great danger In confiding to it the absolute power he would centre in Parliament. But, unfortunately, that lies off somewhere about the Millenium. And till then we cannot afford to do without some more immediate checks on jobbery and maladministration. than even the triennial Parliaments he proposed. If Mr Stevens would consider but for one moment the different ways in which his criticisms on the Provincial Government and his criticisms on the Central Government were received by his audience, he would see how empty was his favourite phrase, “ Parliamentary responsibility,” which he used on Monday night to untie every knot. His references to Provincial politics were met with cheers, groan®, or hisses from the whole audience; his references to the Colonial Parliament, though they were much more vivid and persistent, only elicited an occasional “ hear, hear.” Distance will so effectually hedge in the Wellington Government from all local criticism or interest throughout the Country, that they may do whatever they please with the revenues and administration, provided they can but hoodwink the Opposition—a thing not difficult to do at times, and especially during the recess. Where is the Provincial Executive that would fiare to try such jobbery as he pointed out in the transactions of the Central Government P Such an Executive would be turned out covered with the scorn and loathing of the people of the Province. We see how even blundering and shortsighted economy meets with something that looks remarkably like execration. What is done in Wellington will be looked upon as unintelligible or incurable, and will seldom or never rouse local criticism. Mr Stevens would, in spite of this, gather the whole reins of power into the hands of the Central Government by the system of nomination. He is plainly deluded by the fallacy that'

the House of Representatives, including the Executive, wUI be thoroughly purified as soon as he sets foot within the threshold of the Chamber.