THE Marlborough Express. SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1868.

Marlborough Express, Volume III, Issue 102, 15 February 1868, Page 3

THE Marlborough Express.

SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1868.

“ Give me tiie liberty to know, to utter, and to rrgue freely according’ to conscience, above all other liberties.” —Milton.

We have had standing over for several weeks, a series of lengthy letters from our intelligent correspondent, Mr, H. Cooke, but have not, for various reasons, been able to afford space for them. In these, the writer traces the causes which led to the passing of the Public Debts, Public Revenues, and Loans Consolidation Acts in their present state, and we draw certain deductions which show that the Provinces are not likely to “ die” so easily.

As the whole:of the Provincial Loans—exclusive of Southland, and the part of the Half-Million Loan of 1856, which was divided among the Provinces—amounts to £2,359,000, of which Canterbury, Otago, and Southland are liable for £2,015,000 — it is easy to ; see that Mr. Moorhouse’s scheme of dividing the Colony into Counties, and saddling the Colony with all the

Provincial debts, is not likely to want supporters. Canterbury lias always been the Province which has urged on the most extravagant expenditure, and was the most vehement of any in urging on the Native War. In conjunction with Wellington, she forced the Panama contract upon the colony, which now hangs like a millstone on its neck, and is fast dragging it to ruin; and if she can now retain her Land Fund, by having it settled on her Counties, she might well afford to give up part of the Customs. Westland being now separated, the Customs Revenue of Canterbury must be very much reduced, while the interest of her Provincial debt amounts to £50,400 per annum, exclusive of her share of the Half-million Loan ! Now, if she could transfer her liabilities to the Colony, she would lose little by giving up her share of the Customs, and if the General Government would pay its own Departmental expenses, that is, those Provincial ly charged, she would be a gainer. In Southland, the] General Expenses Provincially charged, and the Interest on her Loan, exceed her half-share of her Customs revenue, and are therefore defrayed out of her Land fund. She ought therefore to follow the lead of Canterbury. Marlborough is in a similar position, owing to the unfair manner in which her Customs revenue is calculated, and if a scheme could be carried out by which all the present General Government expenses, together with the maintenance of gaols, police, hospitals, &c., could be made a charge upon Colonial revenue, and her Land fund handed over to her intact, to be spent by some local body on her own local wants—she also should be a supporter of Mr. Moorhouse’s proposition. Hawke’s Bay would also probably join the foregoing, for similar reasons. Wellington’s half-Customs will reach £60,000, and her Permanent Charges are £14,000 per annum, therefore her clear interest is the continuance of the present system. Nelson’s interest is the same, her half-share of Customs being in round numbers, £38,000, and her Permanent charges £6,500. Otago has a like interest, her half-Customs being about £130,000, and Permanent charges about £42,000. Auckland’s share of Customs, &c., amounts to about £IOO,OOO, and her permanent charges are £30,000 per annum, while she has no Land Fxmd. Taranaki has no Land Fund, and little else.

We have derived much pleasure from a perusal of Sir David Monro’s able Essay as read before the Nelson Reform League, and propose to show in our next, how this Province would derive much benefit if such a scheme could be carried out.

“ Nothing extenuate, Nor set down aught in malice.” The proprietor of the Marlborough Mews would do well to study the motto we have chosen above, for his production of last week “ out-herod’s Herod ; ” more than one-fourth of its leading matter —or more correctly, out of four columns and a fraction of new matter, about one column and a quarter —is devoted to us, and although we still have the warning voice of our contemporary the Press ringing in our ears, advising us to avoid the fate of the Mews , which “ had been reduced, though of older standing than the Expeess, to a mere nullity as far as its influence for good goes, affording a useful warning,”—we feel that the impudence and charlatanship of those who pretend to conduct it, demand a passing notice ; and in so doing, we shall pass over the manifold orthographical errors and new words contained therein, as well as the page of old advertisements made to do duty twice over in the same sheet, and the prominent position assigned to Professor Holloway’s free announcement. The Mews, of late, seeks to elevate itself upon the affairs of this Province, and most indecently, as we have before shewn, gloats upon its difficulties as a state she should be proud of. We have been amused, and yet pained at the exhibition of meanness in decrying a thing because it no longer offered an opportunity for plunder. The writer of the article in question evidently seeks, for private and personal reasons, to fix a policy upon us, and make us responsible for opinions and language which he impudently considers will damn us in public estimation, and tend to his advantage ; and, while this course is nothingnew, never has it been so apparent as in the article under notice, in which the object is shown by the personality conveyed in the remark about the ‘‘Government Printer,” to which we shall recur again presently. He takes credit for representing the true state of the Province, insinuating 1 that we do not, and pretends to enlighten us,

while he is simply misleading the few who read his articles, but what are the facts t In an article which appeared in this place upon the 18th ult., we informed our read" ers how the General Government—after Marlborough had been released from the unjust debt of £12,000 —had made a demand for £1,601, for interest on the HalfMillion Loan, which had accrued before the sponging-out process had been gone through ; together with a further claim of £227 on the Separate, or monthly Account of the Province. That under the Public Revenues Act 1867, the Land Fund, instead of being handed over to the Province direct, had now to pass through the hands of the General Government, which lias the power to deduct therefrom any balance arising during the month. We urged that as a series of years had been granted to other Provinces for the payment of monies due by them, we were hardly dealt with when our Land Fund was seized in an arbitrary and despotic manner on account of the arrears of Interest; and concluded by remarking that—- “ Had a fair basis been adopted for estimating our fair share of Customs’ Duties and Ordinary Revenue, there is good reason to believe that out* Expenditure, by reason of the recent reductions, would have been brought within our income, and we should have been, as a province in a fair and prosperous condition, but now—with an unexpected series of debts, and our estate sequestrated, we tremble for the consequences.” A week later, the News had an article, as we have said before, in bad taste, declaring the Province was dead! and giving a grossly garbled statement of the causes which had led to such a result. The following week, he re-printed the article in what he calls a summary, a process which recals to memory the following extract from our Wellington contemporary, who recently said, —

“We remember in reading the daily life of the Pitcairn Islanders some time ago, being particularly struck by a statement that those simpleminded people are accustomed, when attending public worship, to have the Church of England service read over three times (we believe it is three times) lest any part of it should he forgotten." We presume it is on this principle that the News acts in dishing up its garbage agaim However, of this we have no reason to complain ; if its readers are content, so are we. A fortnight ago, we reviewed the ground taken by the writer, in which we declared no policy, but took up one line of argument. As the community had received no benefit from the hands of the General Government in the past, but the reverse, so we had none to look for in the future, from the grasping avarice of the Centralists, who evidently aim at a supreme authority, contrary to the wish of the people, or a majority in the Assembly of the People’s Representatives. On the other hand hundreds—might we not with justice say thousands —of persons had received a benefit from the present Provincial Government. and we said this in consequence and in allusion to the joyous statements of the News, and this leads us to the queries we put. We did not use either the language imputed to us, nor any bearing the same signification, and there is only one epithet—aud that a very short one—to be applied to those who are guilty of such misrepresentation. The question we put was this :—“ How shall we as a community, or as individuals, derive a benefit from the process ” of dying. And again we enquired —“ Who are the ‘ few who derive emolument ’ —has he (the writer) not derived a benefit—and who does not T We then went on to show what amount of money had been spent during the last three months in various ways, chiefly in public works, and among working men. We further enquired in these exact words, which lie now before us, —“ Who will [in case the Province came to grief], cause the money to be spent in roads and improve* ments 1” The trifling circumstance of the misplacement of a note of interrogation in the quotation, authorises the writer to call it a “ clumsy effort at subtlety,” and to devote a dozen-and-a-half lines to animadversion thereon. He now pretends to answer these queries, but in such a lame and roundabout manner that it is difficult to see his meaning; but it is briefly this : -—That if we transfer all we have to the General Government, then we should be so much the better off' by the amount spent in departmental expenses. Row, as we have before intimated, we doubt this very much. First, because we have no confidence in the General Government, which has given us no proof of an economical disposil tion, but as we have before shown, the contrary. It does not reduce “billets,” as our friend elegantly puts it—but makes more. An instance of its “ economy” is is shown in the circumstance that whereas £5,000 was voted by the Assembly for the expenses attending the reception ot Prince Alfred, it is now stated that it hi

intended to spend £15,000 ! —nor is this all, but simply the latest instance—a feat worthy of those who burdened the Colony with the Panama subsidy, which costs us £55,000 a-year, and is not a scintilla of service to this Province at least. Secondly —we do not see how so many of the present staff of officials will be dispensed with, even by the General Government, who would, in case they got the power, still requite officials to do the work. As for the “ red tape,”—well, there is a degree of it now, but our friend knows little about General Government routine, if he thinks there would not be a wonderful increase in it. We recommend him to peruse the Civil Service Act, coupled with the recent regulations made. Here is an instance of the mode of working. An account has to be made out in duplicate upon forms called vouchers, then they are sent to the payee to be signed, in the course of a few months they come back, and the payee must sign them again as having received the money, and in a day or two more, he gets it ! As to the number of persons in Government employ, we agree that one or two might be dispensed with, and have urged it months ago, which our opponent never did. He undertakes to shew us that the General Government has the power to deduct accounts of old standing from a current month’s account, and quotes the 46th clause of the Public JRevenues Act to prove his position. But the clause in question does not apply to the case in point, but has reference only to the making-up of the regular monthly accounts. The £1,601 is an extra incurred many months previously, but it applies to the £227 right enough, and we never thought otherwise. The remainder of the article is simply nonsense, originating in the vivid imagination of the writer, since the facts and figures are misstated. The sum in dispute is, we repeat, £1,601, Interest for two years on the HalfMillion Loan, and has no reference to the Nelson Debt whatever. Personal animus is at the bottom of all this abuse of the Province, and our humble selves, as is evident, had we no other reason, from the reference to the “ Government Printer.” We are supposed to have asked “ Who are the 4 few who derive emolument ’ from the establishment,” that is—only half our question is conveniently made use of, for the purpose of casting odium upon the proprietor of this journal, as indicated by the word ‘ 4 he.” The personality is worthy of the brain that conceived it, revealing its author, and his object, but how any stigma should rest upon a man because he takes work from the Government seems odd. Did he receive a bonus in some way—say to sell the town and district to a rival district, as a newspaper proprietor in Marlborough is said to have done once, and then, after getting all he could out of it, sell his buyers, and return to his first love again—we could understand it. But where a printer enters into open competition, and has work under Government only because his tender was lower than any other persons’, surely it is not a crime to accept it. N one knows better than the proprietor of the News ho w this is, seeing that he was the Government Printer himself for a period of six or seven years, until the proprietor of the Express tendered at less than half the rate formerly paid. In brief, his jealousy is fired, and he wishes to extinguish the Express, which he would fain make the public believe, exists but on Government patronage, and would “ stand or fall ” with it. He would prevent—were he able—another man from gaining an honest livelihood, without having the skill or judgment to hold his own when he had the field entirely to himself. But none who seek to deceive, blind others so much as themselves, and if our contemporary would look at home, he might discover a better way of putting bread in his 'mouth, than by attempting to deprive others of the fair reward of their labors. The Express can, and will exist without any bribes, or patronage beyond that of the people. We must apologise to our readers for taking up so much of our space with such an unworthy subject, but it appeared necessary to say this much in explanation, and we are desirous before closing these remarks to state plainly what our own views and policy are, and so obviate any more wilful errors on the part of the Neus. We are decidely of opinion that as all power should be vested in the people, that system which gives the nearest and most direct representation—which enables the executive power to be most readily got at, and influenced by the people; in other words, the most complete form of local self-government—is the best. Without avowing ourselves as being in favour of Provincialism, and a belief that nothing else will do, we do believe it to come

nearer to our views and the public interest than any other system at 'present. We acknowledge it has its defects, into which we do not propose to enter, but, as we have before said, we are in favour of any improvement which can be shown to be such.