Marlborough Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. WEDNESDAY, JULY 21,1886,

Marlborough Daily Times, Volume VIII, Issue 1911, 21 July 1886, Page 2

Marlborough Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. WEDNESDAY, JULY 21,1886,

Sir George Grey having succeeded, on Friday afternoon, in setting the House by the ears on the District Railways debentures question, did not again appear on the scene. That was characteristic of Sir George. The debate that followed his motion for the adjournment of the House was one of the most painful that has occurred, perhaps, within the four walls of the Representative Chamber. Nothing further has been shown against Major Steward, and on the evidence, as taken by the Com*

m'ttee, be is innocent of anything dishonorable. So far as he is con rerned, however, his position has been made much worse bv the debate of Friday, by reason of the very severe things that were imputed—most unfairly imputed—'o him. [here were nob wanting men who were mean enough to suggest and insinuate that Major Steward might possibly have had this or that idea in his mind, and so on. To our mind nothing could be more contemptible than conduct such as this, for Major Sneward has no means of proving that, at different stages of the affair in question, he did not think thi3 or that. To accuse a man o 5 what he may possibly have thought in the direction ot a corrupt act is about the meanest thing we ever heard of. Major Steward can. not assail such a prosecution as that, and judgment must go against him. The ovil sugges ions made by some of his manly brother-members will stick to him for many a long day The House, in fact, mate a terrible mistake a day or two before iu agreeing to a certain resolution moved by the Premier, and, discovering the ridiculous position, endeavored to get out of it by making Major Steward a kind of scapegoat. They sot him up to be preached at in order that all the world might know how pure and incorrupt were the members of the Representative Chamber. There was nothing in the evidence upon which to hang a sermon on political morality, and members therefore had to suppose and suggest that-, although the proof was all the other way, Major Steward may have thought certain dollars would come his way if a certaiu Bill became law and that, therefore, he labored hard —“ with ar assiduity amounting to impudence,” as one frothy individual expressed it—to make that Bill pass! And that is how political reputations are lost and made ! Ail that the House had to concern itself w.iih was the evidence taken by the Committee it appointed to enquire into the matter. What Major Steward thought was nothing to anybody, especially when there was no proof that he did think the particular thing. As a matter of fact there is his word that he thought quite the other way; that he thought he should be away in England—whither he had already sent his family—instead of hawking about railway debentures in New Zealand. But we are disgusted with the whole business and, notwithstanding all the clap-trap morality that has been preached for the benefit of 'any who may swallow the wretched bunkum, we don’t believe there are ten men in the House who would have Ift the cliance'pass them , or who would have thought that they were doiug wrong in doing what. Major Steward did. We have previously expressed our opinion as to the evidence in the matter, and there is, therefore, no occasion to go over that ground. The debate of Friday had one go d result ) it enabled Sir J ulius Yogel to thoroughly clear himself from the charges made against him —the secret, malevolent, contemptible charges —by his political enemies. He did not even know his name had been mentioned —in the correspondence until Thursday night, and he was able to bring documentary evidence to show how false were: the cruel slanders that had been carefully set alloat. This explains what was hitherto unaccountable, namely, Sir J uliu3 Vogel’s acquiescence in the resolution passed by the Honse on Wednesday. But it was Sir Julius Vogel whom certaiu men—mm who had made virtuous speeches on Friday night—wanted to catch, it was ho they wished to degrade. And when he wanted to clear himself in indignant language from the attempt made to dishonor him, tlien his enemies railed at him for his indignation. They had to rail at something, of course, and, when they had worked themselves out in denouucing Sir Julius Vogel’s strong language—that being all they could find against him then—they turned on Major Steward and found him guilty of the possibility of a thought of a reward for his political services ! Sir Julias would have done better to have submitted his proofs in silence ; his calumniators were not worthy of his honest indignation. The whole business is bad from the day the Oommitteeof enquiry was appointed, the only good thing about it being Sir J ulius V o gel’s defence and acquittal. Major Steward, we believe, judging from the evidence, to be equally innocent of wrong-doing, but it will take him a long time to get over Friday night’s debate.