SUMMARY FOR EUROPE.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXXIV, Issue 9150, 9 July 1890, Page 2

SUMMARY FOR EUROPE.

OUR LETTER SOME.

POLITICAL AND OTHER GOSSIP.

THE GOVERNOR’S SPEECH.

It did after all contain something—an echo of the famous Queenstown speech. What is the policy in the Queenstown ■peeoh ? That's what Mr Ballance wanted to know, in hia r speech on the Address-in-Eeply. He proceeded hy the process of guessing, and Mr Fergus made so many running commentaries that at last Mr Ballance gave it up. “ The Queenstown speech,” said he, with delicate irony, “has been so much amended and explained that I must really decline to try. and think what there is left of it.” The House laughed at the incident, which showed the hollowness of the speech more than anything else. But Speeches from the Throne are always vague. They are constructed so, in order that even the Opposition may agree with the Addresses-ia-Reply. Their principal value is that they give an opportunity for the ventilation of grievances which may become afterwards the basis of serious attack. THE ADDRESS IN REPLY. The debate was short, sharp, but not decisive for the simple reason that the Opposition was magnanimous enough to wait for the Financial Statement. The speeches made leave the administration of the recess not a feather to fly with. Every one is a powerful argument for its logical conclusion, which is the expulsion of Ministers from office. Especially so, seeing that the Ministers confined themselves, like Mr Fergus to personal recriminations. They let judgment to a large extent-go by default. Pactions Opposition! Well, if the Opposition is not to be allowed to spend ten hours in criticising the - administration of ten months, what is the need for having any Opposition at all ? The-Opposition was in danger of losing its opportunity for criticising the recess, and was, therefore, quite right to avail itself of its constitutional privilege of placing its criticisms on record. The incident which has taken principal attention is the manner by which Sir George Grey has struck for the leadership. It is not the leadership of the Opposition he wants —he hates the Opposition as much as he hates the Government, perhaps more. The leadership of the ideal Liberal Party is thq- position Sir George .has always coveted. By rushing to demand a dissolution on the very first poasibleoccaßion,SirGeorge hasplaced himself before the public as the champion of the new Party that is growing up rapidly and coming to the front as the representative of the force of organised labour. “You have a new electoral right,” he says to labour, “and this right is denied you by the Government, and most likely by the House. I am the only one who insists on getting it for you. My speeches are not devoted to the minor-concerns about which both sides (a plague on them both say I) twaddle wearily and drearily.” That is the “Greygian” Gospel. Unfortunately for its success, it happens that last session the leader of the Opposition broughc forward the very same request for a dissolution. If it is a merit in Sir George Grey to insist now for no further a certainßill was passed agh*. there must be 365 >fp r hi a demand Tor immediate effeofluafe&ftflr the Bill wai passed. THE' FINANCIAL STATEMENT. The figures with their satisfactory surplus have been, of course* all anticipated. Their most remarkable feature is that the margin is not apparently quite a safe margin, the estimated profit for the current year being £4§,000, against the Supplementary Estimates and the cost of the defence scheme which the Defence Minister ia incubating. The policy, such as it is, has been not wholly anticipated, but partly so. The leading feature is the proposal to provide for the loading and surveying of Crown lands, and the purchasing of Native lands, out of the Loans to Local Bodies Act. The first part is, in principle, the good sound colonisation., which makes the land pay ohargesof settlement; butthedetailsarenot too promising. The second requires to be considered by the light of further details and discussion. Besides the figures and the policy (which by the way contains provision for amending the Land Act against dummy ism. and other defects; strange admission!) the Statement consists of a review of the Retrenchment Financial Administration since 1887, and what has been called an essay on the condition of the Colony. The former of these is based on tbe curious assumption that if the Atkinson plan of squaring the finances had not been adopted, there would have been no other. The essay is disfigured by a too ingenious attempt to extract comfort out of the exodus of population. For the rest, there is an emphatic declaration against borrowing. The policy won’t go very far, even if approved, to counteract the evils graphically admitted in the essay, and the Statement is one of the longest on record. The debate on the Financial Statement served to show how fallacious many of its assertions were. Mr Ballance’s amendment was rejected, hut the majority for the Government was the narrow one of six, when eighty-six members were counted. 818 HABEY ATKINSON. The most melancholy thing of the whole session, indeed of many sessions, is the scene in the Ministerial caucus, in which Sir Harry Atkinson explained the critical condition of his health; Rumour and gossip, not by any means unsympathetic, had prepared the public mind for a change in his vigorous career. When Sir Harry had to let Mr Mitchelson read his Financial Statement, the general impression of the Premier’s approaching retirement became definite. That impression was justified hy the explanation made to the caucus. Sir Harry left himself in the hands of his party, and his party paid him the high compliment of keeping him at its head. Continuity ia thus secured—to the Government of life, and to the Premier of honour. THE GOVERNMENT AND THE BANK. A decided set is being made against the Bank, a set of the most mischievous character, and not a little unpatriotic. Of Mr Buckley’s conduct we prefer to say nothing more than we said some months ago, except that Mr Buckley has supplied the powder to the lower financial journals to fire away at the Bank, while judicious people grieve at the greatness of the smoke. This powder was wrapped up in certain packets of information, otherwise called letters, written by one of the highest officers of the Bank confidentially to Mr Buckley, while occupying a responsible position on the Bank s Directory, We leave people to_ criticise

that sort of conduct in any language they choose. Pub it to any gentleman you meet, and abide by his decision. Smce then leaflets, containing the criticisms of these London critics, with the extracts from the confidential communications, have been scattered broadcast by the thousand. They have, of course, no imprint; who is responsib e for them we do not, care to enquire, any more than we should care to follow up a skunk to his abominable den. But when these things are taken up by members o Parliament, and made matter of question, no one likes it. Mr Fisher’s question having been answered by the reply no true,” it is time the whole business dropped. The best reply to the outside machinations is the rise in the quotation o the Bank’s shares. The financiers know quite well that confidential letters with both sides of a question, and a in this case only one side is being ea with before the public, for the evi en purpose on the part of the unprincip e leafleteer of ruining the Bank. ’fbisco eeevice. A charming paragraph in the Governor a Speech promises us the 2-Jd i 1 can be done without inflicting addition* burden on the taxpayer. This, we are g a to learn, means that the Government as recognised that the payment of aa American subsidy will revolutionise t sir method of looking at the question. If can have both the San Francisco service and the direct service, and can in addition enjoy the boon of a ocean postage, i will be a great convenience and pleasure. Ministers seem, however, to been moved by the comments of the public to a reconsideration not dependent on t e American subsidy. IE that subsi y should prove, as it has hitherto prove , an ignis fatuus, kept dancing as 0 raison d’etre of Mr Creighton s position, and seeing that the New South Wales peop e persist in their refusal to contribute, t o ‘Frisco service is doomed. In which case Ministers say they are prepared to mako terms with the direct steamers on a basis of 2 sd. That ia a very fine commentary on the “ impossible,” which the whole of the officials screamed out when the news of Mr Qoschen’s announcement first arrived. For our part we have always been unable to see why packages of letters should be charged a freight so abnormally more than the freight imposed upon goods. Something more is required truly, but why so much as is demanded ? It is curious bhat not a word about a penny postage rate inland should have transpired since the new departure. THE CABLE CHARGES. Mr Goachen ia apparently under the idea that British interests do not warrant him in recommending that the Exchequer shall take a share in the increased expense (a guarantee) of the cheaper ocean cable system. We confess we do not like to look into these things too closely. The fact is, of course, that if we were to reduce everything to figures, after the manner of a partnership business, the Colonies would he found to be very much in debt to the Mother Country. In times past the Old Country paid everything, and we paid nothing. Of course, the British interests affected by the ocean cables are at least aa great as the Colonial. The commerce has two ends, and the defence has two sides. But it has become the fashion rather to pitch into the Colonies of late for too much haggling in money matters. It is a fashion for which the colonists are themselves to a largo extent answerable. For the sake of the old inequality we can very well afford to be generous. Let us give ourselves the privilege of treating “the old man.” John Bull will growl out his gratitude for evermore. THE EAILWAY COMMISBIONEES. Messrs M'Kerrow, Maxwell and Hannay have done remarkably well in the decision they have come to. It would have been absurd to fight to the death about an hour a day. We must say we should have preferred to have seen the difficulty settled by arbitration. That would have been a precedent invaluable aa inaugurating the infallible method of escaping from strikes for evermore. Now that the Commissioners have given way, it is for them to minimise that £25,000 a year the concession is to cost the country. We conclude it is .£25,000, because the whole concession asked for was set down by them as equal to twice that sum. We think they will not have insuperable difficulty, because, if we are correctly informed, the question is largely a question of rolling stock. It has been well said somewhere that if the agitation bears no better fruit than the compulsory resort to the much-needed increase of rolling stock, it will not have been in vain. LABOUB AGITATION. The newest thing in the labour agitation of this country is the union of the telegraph employees. It has come about with the suddenness and the noiselessness of the foliage in the spring Silently as the spring time Her crown of verdure weaves, And all the trees on ail the Mils Put forth their thousand leaves. That augurs good planning, which is the infallible forerunner of success. The telegraph operators are the most useful, capable, industrious class of the public service, and they are the worst paid. A beggarly wretched pittance is theirs. We should like to see the Eaikes that would stop them from organising here. The keynote of the speech of the member for Sb Albans, who addressed his constituents just before Parliament reassembled, was the reference to the organisation of labour. Mr Reeves sees that the new force which is rising up in the world is a good thing; not by any means one of those great dangers in the presence of which timid men hold their tongues, and lose their heads. When the thoughtful politicians take up a question of this kind, they spoil the ground for the demagogues. Young New Zealand is thoughtful, we are glad to see, and can see far as well as straight. This great organisation of forces is the great force which is going to dominate the polities of the future. In comparison, what are the differences between the bulk of our politicians of the day, but the differences between tweedledum and tweedledee ? When tbe cry is raised that there are no parties, the tacit understanding is that none of the graver questions underlying the smooth surface of society should bo raised. Of course, with that understanding there are no parties in the country. Atkinson, and Bryce, and Fulton, and the bulk of the House, with a few exceptional men apart, are all of the same colour. But the problems of tbe future are the problems that will decide parties. Those who will do the best service to their country are those who see groat advantage in the organisation of labour.