POLITCIAL.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXX, Issue 439, 13 October 1908, Page 2

POLITCIAL.

Mr. Frankland opens his Campaign.

A Vote of Confidence.

Mr. F. W. Frankland, candidate for Manawatu, and a supporter of the Ward Government, opened his political campaign in the Public Hall last night before a large number of electors. Mr. W. S. Stewart, 8.A., occupied the chair. The candidate spoke for about an hour and a half and received a splendid hearing. The candidate’s speech was repeatedly applauded, particularly his references to local matters, the labour question and in defence of the present administration.

Mr. Stewart, in briefly introducing the candidate, said he was a gentleman of high standing and character, and well-known throughout the Dominion. On rising to speak Mr. Frankland was received with a hearty round of applause. In opening, Mr Frankland said he had the honour, for the second time, to address his hearers as a Parliamentary candidate, soliciting their suffrages at a general election. It was a little more than three years, he said, since he bad first mounted a political platform in the Manawatu district, and offered his services as a representative in the Colonial Legislature. On that occasion, he stated, he had had the pleasure and privilege of submitting his general views on politics and on their application in this country ; he had that speech printed (probably some of his hearers would remember’receiving a copy of same), and distributed it by the thousand, because he considered that a candidate who offered himself for the suffrages of the people should sufficiently feel the solemnity of his position to give hostages, as it were, by placing his views on permanent record in black and white, so that he could not retract them afterwards, except by openly confessing to an honest change of opinion. In his case, Mr Frankland reiterated, no such change of opinion had taken place during the last three years, unless it was in one of two matters of very small detail. The views which he had expressed to the public three years ago, even although he may not at the time have explained himself in language as suitable as that which (with his present greater knowledge of Dominion politics) he could now employ, were, in all essential particulars, his views still, thence, although he wished to supplement, and meant to supplement, his political address of last campaign by fresh speeches, he had the advantage (for so he esteemed it) of coming before the electors, already committed to a definite platform in regard to Colonial politics (or, as it now was, Dominion politics), by virtue of the address which he gave in 1905. At the outset of last campaign, knowing little of the balance of Party feeling within this electorate, and buoyed up by the encouragement of some of his Foxton supporters, he had hopes of being possibly able to head the poll; and this, in spile of the fact that there were, including himself, no less than three Liberals in the field, and only one Opposition candidate. He soon found that this was too sanguine a view to take of the possibilities. Nevertheless he was under a deep debt of gratitude to those Foxton friends who at that time urged him so strongly to test the feelings of the electors. None but the parliamentary candidate himself can know how much such encouragement is worth to him. And whatever may be the result of this second contest in which he is now engaged, he wants to take the earliest opportunity of thanking most warmly those, both in Foxton and elsewhere, who had shown an enthusiasm for his candidature and who have expressed their belief that he would be a fit man torepresent them in Parliament. However, in that struggle of 1905, he soon found —when he left Foxton and the southern end of the electorate, where Liberalism was weir known to be strong,' and began to canvass further north where Mr Seddon’s government was at that time not so well liked, he soon realised that parties were too evenly balanced in the constituency as a whole to make it safe for three Liberal candidates to be splitting each others’ votes, while the whole force of the Opposition were concentrated on one man. He therefore at once retired in favour of Mr John Stevens and worked for him during the remainder of the campaign as the secretary of his committee here. His speeches and addresses were, however, printed in extenso and circulated among the electors as a permanent record of his views. The result of the poll proved that he had acted wisely in the interest of the Liberal Party, whose chief —the late Mr Seddon—thanked him most warmly for what he had done. The figures of the poll taken on the 6 th of December 1905, showed that while Mr Stevens scored just a few votes over 2,400,the then sitting member (who was sole Opposition candidate) managed to secure well above 2,000, so that the margin of victory for the Liberal champion was only between three and four hundred. Had the speaker gone to the poll and even secured only a few hundred votes, he said it was certain that, as nearly all those votes would have been drawn ' from the Liberal champion and not from Mr Vile, victory would have been turned to defeat, and the Manawatu constituency could not have been recaptured for the forces of

progress. Thanks to Sir Joseph' Ward’s

SECOND BALLOT BILE, all this was now quite different, We do not at all injure our party now in standing side by side, and as competitors (though under the same Partyflag, as it were), and appealing as Liberals for your suffrages against a united Opposition concentrated x on the candidature of Mr Edward Newman. Unless the Opposition candidate could at the first ballot secure more than halt of all the votes cast (in which very improbable event he would rightly be declared member for Manawatu), a Second Ballot had to be taken seven days later between the two candidates who stood highest on the original poll. At least one of those candidates must, necessarily in the present case, be a and therefore if, as was hoped and believed, the majority of the constituency is liberal and goes to the poll at the Second Ballot, that Liberal would then he elected. We did not split each others’ votes as was done under the bad old system. On the contrary, we now strengthen our Party by offering the electors the choice (which they never had before) between different types of Liberals, one of whom (like himself) may appeal more to one section of the electorate-say, the No-License advocates,—while auother may appeal more to the opponents of No-License He could now come before the electors as a candidate without injuring his Party. He did not now need to decide the delicate and distressing problem whether it is worse to diminish the people’s choice of candidates by submitting, in the interests of Party discipline, to permanent exclusion from public life.

THIS RESTRICTION OF THE PEOPLE’S CHOICE of representatives is a very great evil, and—on the whole —perhaps even worse than the slipping in of a minority candidate as a result of vote-splitting in the camp of the more numerous Party. It is no light evil that the people should be so nearly confined in their choice of representatives (as they have been under the mis''chevious old system) to candidates nominated by the Party-manager's. It is hardly an exaggeration to say that this to a large extent actually disfranchised the electors. They were reduced to Hobson’s choice of voting either tor a gentleman acceptable to the leader of the Party In power, or for a gentleman able to the leading lights (whether* national or local) of the party opposing the Government. Instead of this, they ought to be. t : able to give an effective vote to any citizen whatever who is acceptable to themselves. And under the"Y new system—that of the Second Ballot —they will be able to dtT this. The electors were not obliged to choose between the accepted candidate of the two Parties that are contending for power in this Dominion. Vote-splitting and votewasting no longer exists under the new system of the Second Ballot: And this great improvement in electoral law was one of the many things for which we have to thank Sir Joseph Ward. Within the last few days, said the speaker, this Bill, shorn of its objectionable features, but retaining all its salutary clauses intact, had become the. law of _ the land, so that he need not hesitate any longer to address the electors on the understanding (which had now become a certainty) that the * forthcoming election would be conducted under its provisions ; they would be invited, a few weeks > , hence, to vote —for the first time in ‘ ■ the Dominion’s history —under the Second Ballot Act, which enabled each one to exercise his or her suffrage without asking any other question than that, “Which - of the candidates presenting themselves would be preferable ?” Frankland contended that the electors were, for the first time, emancipated really, and not merely in name —from the trammels of Party machinery and Party nominations. It was no longer necessary to trouble about thinking whether the candidate of one’s prelerence was likely to get strong support elsewhere, and to worry oneself lest one’s vote would be wasted in case the real fight turned out to be between two much stronger candidates. Under the old system, the speaker remarked, no election was really free and fair except when there were only two men in the field, but under the new system just inaugurated, there lyas perfect fairness and freedom, even although, as in this constituency, . no less than four candidates were offering themselves. HIS OPPONENTS. y- . Dike Mr Stevens, the speaker • was an enthusiastic supporter of_ the present Government, and anVequally enthusiastic admirer of its predecessors in liberalism —the Ballance and Seddon Governments r—though he had been independtn t in criticising the points (few, and relatively less important in his opinion) where he considered they had gone wrong. Messrs Newman and Gardner had already had their speeches during this campaign reported at considerable length in the newspapers, and he felt grati- v fied to learn, on perusing same, . of the courteous way in which they had both alluded to their opponents (including himself) in struggle. From the bottom of his : heart .Mr Frankland reciprocated the sentiment which Mr Newman had given utterance to in his addresses in Foxton and elsewhere, namely, that nothing would happen during the contest which would cause personal ill-feeling. His feeling of personal respect for those who were competing with him was so strong that he was sure there was little danger of his being an of- i|

-fender in this regard. Mr John Stevens he actually worked for during the last campaign. And Ids only reason for competing with him now was that certain political questions had arisen, at present outside strictly Party politics but in his opinion supremely important, in regard to which he was sanguine enough to believe that a majority of this electorate agreed with him as against Mr Stevens. Then Mr Newman and Mr Gardner were gentlemen for whom he had a deep respect: and, it was only Mr Nevyman whom he could feel to be in the full sense of the word a political opponent. Pie had throughout life had a larger number of warm and dear personal friends in the “ Opposition ” ranks then in his own Party. At the same time, he should be failing in a public duly if he did not make it perfectly clear to the electors that he did not consider

the opposition had, as a Party (and making exception of certain noble-hearted leaders like Sir Harry Atkinson and Mr Rolleston), been politically the true friends of the majority of the people here in New Zealand. But although he could be trusted, for the reasons he had named, not to import any disagreeable personalities into the political struggle, he thought there was perhaps no shorter or more satisfactory way of putting them in possession of his views outside what he acquainted them three years ago, than by going through the points made by his opponent (Mr Newman) in his addresses and briefly defining his own attitude with regard to each ot them : and he hoped to deal with the greater number of them in a further speech during the present campaign. Mr Frankland then gave a brief resume of his principal views enunciated at last election, and to which he still adhered. His address then consisted of

SEVEN SPECIFIC PLANKS as follows : Firstly, freehold with restriction of area, in order to prevent the growth of a landed aristocracy, (2) In support of the Seddon administration, but reserving to himself the right to criticise where he considered them mistaken. (3) Supported No-License, but with tenderness and justice towards the licensees, whose public permit would be cancelled. (4) Favoured the referendum and initiative

as safeguards against plutocratic tendencies which are happily not yet much in evidence here, but which with his .American experience, he had learnt to dread as a great world-movement, much more than most of his fellow colonists do. (5) He favoured making the Bible in Schools question one for decision by Referendum. (6) He supported preferential trade and an Imperial Council. (7) He urged redressing the unfairness of Government, and in this he included all governments, Conservative as well as Liberal, in not spending our legitimate share of the public money on the Manawatu district. He then referred to the glaring example in the Government’s refusal to employ the wharfage dues at Foxton to the improvement of the harbour,

Mr Frankland contended that the feeling in reference to the freehold tenure of land was even more intense in the country districts now than it was three years ago. This was mainly in consequence of one unfortunate provision in the Minister of Lands’ legislative measures, especially in his first Land Bill—the Bill that was so suddenly dropped. Few people would view with satisfaction so unsuitable a tenure as the 33-years’-renewable lease. There was unanimity between his opponents and himself on this point, the chief moral of the situation for us now being to avoid the illogical inferences which Opposition candidates and journals have too frequently drawn from this one blunder, in a Bill which, by other provisions, would have conduced more towards the close settlement of the country in small freeholds than almost any other legislative measure that could be named. It would be dangerous for the Opposition to make Party-capital out of matter connected with land, against a Liberal administration which had such an asset to its credit as the close —settlement land policy of a Seddon, a Ballance, or a John McKenzie. As he promised the electors to give his support to the Seddon Government in 1905, so now, if elected, would he give the same support to their succesors. His idea of independence was not the same as that given by Mr Gardner in his speech at Foxton. The speaker had been aS outspoken and independent as he could be in criticising isolated acts and measures of the Government. He repudiated the 33 years renewable lease, and the so called “ gag ” clause of the Second Ballot Bill, and was in utter disagreement with the 500 majority clause, which was at one stage of the debate conceded by the Premier. THE SECOND BALLOT BILL, though an enormous improvement on the previous illogical and mischievous system, was, in his opinot as satisfactory as the Absolute Majority Bill introduced by MrMcNab. He could not, therefore, be considered as lacking in independence so far as the Government were concerned, although enthusiastic in general support. The electors were entitled to ask a pledge, not necessarily quite unconditional, from the candidates who solicited their suffrages.

THE MEMBERS OF THE CABINET, Mr Frankland continued, were experienced Statesmen, and had been before the public a long time. The leaders of the Opposition, if less versed (through lack of opportunity) ’ in practical administration,

were also well known to the public. It was therefore no wonder if the average elector thought he ought to have some say as to which of the two distinguished sets of men should hold the reins of power in the country where he had to live, and to have a plain declaration from the Parliamentary candidate as to whether that candidate was a supporter of the Government or Opposition. Mr Frankland was willing to respond to this reasonable demand, and gladly labelled himself a supporter of the Ward Government. He had expressed himself as in favour of the Elective Executive, and had preached it as an ultimate ideal ever since his boyhood. He had personally observed how well that system worked in Switzerland. He advised caution before meddling too precipitately with so delicate a piece of mechanism as the relation of legislature to executive. If we had the elective executive (which is hardly likely for the next 50 years), is it to be supposed that the people themselves would not want to have a say in the election ? Though the actual voting would be done by the representative assembly, yet is it to be supposed that the people would not like to be told what statesmen their Parliamentary candidates contemplated entrusting ‘with the administration of the country ? He said the supposition was ridiculous; so that, for these reasons, he held that a candidate should plainly tell the electors to which of the two parties contending for power he belonged. Referring to the

LIQUOR QUESTION, Mr Fraukland advocated the abolition of the present abitrary and undemocratic three-fifths majority in licensing matters, and urged the substitution of that rational majority rule which we rely on in all other matters and which has lifted New Zealand into the proud place of admired of all admirers of enlightened and beneficent legislation. He advocated an equitable regard to the vested interests of licensees. He was entitled to appeal in this respect for special support. He referred to the recent lambing down case at Gisborne which had righteously stirred the public. If the people were in earnest to get this great reform carried, he adjured them all to vote for the man who takes the most advanced ground in respect of it. This question was not outside the pale of politics. If they appreciated the supreme importance of this reform to New Zealand, after striking out the top line on the one ballot paper they should vote on the other paper for a parliamentary candidate who has this reform so much at heart, otherwise they would take away with their right hand what they had just given with the left. He advised them to vote for the candidate whose BARE MAJORITY reform will abolish the open bar through more than half of New Zealand at one single stroke. Referring to the Bible in Schools this should be settled by referendum. If, at any time, a referendum should decide that the Bible shall be read in State Schools, then, fin bare justice, a financial grant-in-aid must be made from the Treasury to the schools of those religious denominations which on conscientious grounds are unable to avail themselves of the Bible teaching in Government schools. In that event this act of mere common justice would be more especially due to our Roman Catholic fellowcitizens, as these are by far the most numerous body that could complain of gross unfairness were the Bible in schools to be carried without such grant-in-aid. Referring to LOCAL WANTS he said it was here we had most ground to criticise a government which has done so much for the country as a whole. Criticism and censure must fall not only on the Liberal administration that is in power, but also —even more — on earlier and Conservative Governments, none of which he said adequately realized what an asset the colony had in the Manawatu district and how that asset needed developing. He contended that the whole of the North Island had been neglected by earlier administrations in comparison with the South Island, and referred to railway construction in the South and the relative populations and expenditures of the two islands, which showed the North Island had suffered in comparison. He pleaded for greater co-operation among members of parliament in this island so as to ensure justice in the allocation of money on public works. He referred to the linking-up of Auckland and Wellington by rail, a feat, the ultimate consequences of which on our local prosperity will vary in magnitude according to our alertness or otherwise in pushing our claims for specific acts of justice towards the district. If there had been a general failure of justice in the past towards this island, there is perhaps no place where that injustice has been more conspicuous than in the case of Manawatu. He then referred to the iniquity with which our river and harbour have been treated and stated that in matters of this kind he felt he could be of special use to the electors if they honoured him with their confidence. A large part of his capital was invested in Foxton, and he had the keeness of self interest as well as his sense of public duty to spur him on to obtain justice from Cabinet Ministers. It was very arguable whether the present method of allocating PUBLIC WORKS EXPENDITURE

Among the various districts by fiat of a central authority is the best that could be devised. The contrary view is a stock argument

with many Opposition candidates who claimed that the centralisation or politicalisation of the Public Works Fund introduces an unwholesome element into party politics. When the Opposition are asked to formulate an alternative plan, they are perhaps somewhat more vague. So long as the present system continues, it behoved every member of Parliament to be on the alert, so that his district is treated justly. As a private citizen and fellow townsman he had spared neither time nor money to promote the district’s interests, more particularly in connection with the river and harbour, in striving to assist Mr Hennessy and others. If elected, he could do 1 far more in this direction, and for the interests of the district generally than he could as a private citizen. He referred to the recent proposal of the river commission, which has been collecting evidence, to divert the Manawatu river from its present course by cutting a channel from the Pong Reach at Whirokino across the sand hills to Hartley’s bend. He slated that one of the local body representatives cynically inquired whether it would not be better that Foxtou should be sacrificed. He called attention to this danger months ago. He quite agreed with Mr Henuessy’s proposal to the Commission, a proposal which would completely safeguard the interests of Foxton. He would be more powerful to deleat this and similar dangers to our interests if he were behind the scenes as a member of Parliament, rather than a Foxtou private property owner. The speaker referred to the rumour asserting the possibility that the Government RAILWAY WORKSHOPS might be removed from Petone, owing to the cramped position of the works in that locality where land was now so dear, and the necessity of more space for the rolling stock needed by the rapidly - growing railway service of the North Island. This question had occupied the attention of the Masterton Chamber of Commerce, which carried a resolution last month to watch the matter in the interests of Masterton. The capacious maw of Palmerston North was likely to be opened to swallow this enormous plum ! If there was anything in it, why should not Foxton, where land was cheaper, and which was the original port of entry for coal from the South Island—why should not Foxton be the chosen locality ? (Eoud applause.) Referring to the

native lands question the speaker had struggled with the intricacies of the native land laws. He considered the present ‘ ’tallica” policy should be abandoned both in the interests, of the noble Maori race, and to render possible the opening up of vast areas ot Native Laud for close settlement. He referred to the unsatisfactory status of the Native Lands in the Auckland province. Tne work of the commissioners, Sir Robert Stout and Mr T. Ngata, would result in a more satisfactory state of affairs. He disagreed with Mr Newman’s remarks re the Maori aristocracy under the present regime. What we were most in danger of was a pakeha aristocracy if the Opposition were allowed to have its way, and it had taken the Liberal party all their time to turn that aristocracy out. Opposition candidates were fond of telling the electors how much the

PUBLIC DEBT has increased since the Liberal Administration took office, but they were careful not to say anything about the six millions invested in the purchase of estates, the loan interest being practically . paid by Crown tenants, resulting the close settlement policy which has, to so large an extent, added to the continuous and still continuing prosperity of New Zealand, —the envy of other nations. The Opposition omitted to mention the four millions lent under the Advances to Settlers Act; investment in profitable State coal mines, Bank of New Zealand shares ; 2 millions advanced to local bodies, the million spent on the purchase of Native Lands; or our railways from which we are about to reap enormous benefits. He admitted that the finance of the Government would have been still more successful had less money been spent on public buildings the and more on reading back blocks. If returned, one of his duties would be to urge the selection of strictly reproductive objects for the destination of loan money. He could perform this function of criticism most usefully, in alliance with, and not in opposition to, the Government. The faults of our Government were as spots on the sun in comparison with those of other Governments. THE LABOUR PROBLEM,

lor the right solution of which more than anything else, he desired to enter public life. To protect the wage workers and the small settlers from exploitation to which they had been eternally subject, the world over, though very much less so in New Zealand during the last 15 years. This object, the speaker continued, was nearest his heart. The manual wage worker would want to know something more definite and concrete than the utterances of Mr Gardner. He agreed that preference must be given to unionists, but it was necessary to go further than that. Unbridled competition must be checked, and the legislation inaugurated by Mr W. P. Reeves mnst be followed to its logical goal. Regulations for a fair wage must be upheld, supplemented by other modes of State interference with the anarchic forces of supply and demand. We must influence by judicial machinery the

element of rent or royalty in reference to the flax problem—in other words, the regulation by the Government of the royalties on plax throughout the Dominion, which would be in the interests of the wage-earners or mill hands, but will at the same time be a relief and protection to the mill owners, i.e. the employers of labour. It was necessary owing to our absolute dependence on the price of hemp in distant markets, which we cannot influence and on our being able to keep up steady supplies to those markets, if our fibre is to maintain our relative position with our competitors there. He agreed with Mr Greig in this particular. The flax industry gives more employment per acre to labour than almost any other, and therefore a true public policy requires that it should be safeguarded by the Government regulation of royalties. It was now recognised that, in the fierce industrial competition of modern times, it is only by a judicious fostering of infant industries that a young nation can expect to grow great and happy and powerful. There were a number of other important questions he would have liked to touch on, such as Chinese exclusion, naval defence, decline in the birthrate, graduated laud tax, state forestry, agricultural education, reform of the legislative Council, but he would leave them to a later date. He had given prominence to matters which most challenge opposition and criticism ; in order that the electorate as a whole may have the means of judging whether he satisfied the requirements of the majority of its voters, and he would respectfully leave the issue in their hands. He resumed his seat amidst prolonged applause. In reply to Mr. W. Collins, Mr. Frankland explained that the Harbour Board Bill had been passed, but- that efforts should be made to get the revenue the Board was entitled to. Mr. Carter moved a vote of thanks and confidence in the speaker. As a vice-president of the Wellington Trades and Labour Council, he was pleased to hear the speaker’s views on labour matters. He would be pleased to join Mr. Frankland’s committee and work to secure his return. Mr. R. Moore seconded the resolution, which was carried unanimously and amidst applause. In expressing the vote to Mr. Frankland, the Chairman said he had not heard a better political speech delivered in Foxton during his residence extending over a period of 25 years. After Mr Frankland had suitably replied, saying how deeply he had been touched by the favourable hearing accorded to him, Mr. Hennessy moved and Mr. Hornblow seconded the follow* ing resolution : That this meeting of electors is strongly of opinion that the vacancy in the Ministry caused through the resignation of Mr Hall-jones should be filled by a member from the North Island, and further, that this meeting is of opinion that no more worthy member has a better claim to the position than Mr A. W. Hogg, M.P. for Mastertou. The resolution was carried unanimously and amidst applause.