REV. J. C. ANDREW AT MOTUEKA.
The J. C. Andrew addressed about 200 electors at the Institute, Motueka, on Friday night, the ladies being well representee!, Mr J. F. Wilson was elected chairman, and in introducing the reverend gentleman spoke of him as one who \va_ well known throughout Nelson.
'. Mr Andrew said that although late in ', the day in ooming forward he oelieved that it was better late than never. He originallj ! intended to contest the City election, but \ as Mr Hursthouse was standing in the , same interest as himself, and being in the , field before him, he had definitely deoided 1 not to stand for Nelson as the prospects of [ either himself or Mr Hursthouse in being 1 returned for Nelson would be considerably reduced if he did so. He came before the ! electors to give his views and it would , remain for them to say whether they were , desirous that he should contest the Waimea , Sounds *• eat after they had heard what his , views were and for him to decide whether he would do so or not afc the close of the . meeting; He also said that it was requisite for all to record their votes at this election, . otherwise those who abstained from voting would have their names struck oil' the roll, , and would thereby be prevented from • voting on the licensing question next March. Though thoy would have the privilege of registering afresh there would not be time to do so. This he held was a matter of vital importance to all that they should record tlieir votes for the candidate they thought would represent them best. 1 not only on account of electing a member but also on account of the important question in March next. '. WOMEN'S FRANCHISE. Mr Andrew claimed to be the first who ever introduced the question of the enfranchisement of women in the New Zealand House of Representatives, as anyone could liuel out for himself by looking np Hansard of 1874, wherein they would find that he gave notice of motion that the word " mal. " be struck out of die Electoral (Qualification Bill, and the only support he received un that occasion was from Sir Julius Yogel. The Bill, however, did not pass the second reading, lie had always held that women should be enfranchised on the principle of one man one vote. Whether ho agreed with that measure or not did not matter, the principle of one man one vote being recognised and acted upon he held that women were justly entitled to the franchise as very many single men were migratory individuals having a settled home nowhere, whereas womeu were mostly stationary, ' had settled homes, aud were more interested in the Slate, and the new franchise strengthened families. On the oue man one vote principle migratory bachelors had greater weight in State affairs as against those who were permanent resident., iv any locality, and who up till now had no voice in State legislation, lie hailed the enfranchisement of women with groat satisfaction. THE I'KESENT GO\ EItNMENT. lie had said that he differed from the present -iovornnient, and was opposed to it, but not altogether. On the land question the Ministers had passed good laws with regard to settlement, and he gave credit where credit was due. The present Mm isters had greatly assisted in settling people on the land, but he would also say that in doing so Vney had carried out many plans advocated years ago by his uld friend and pupil Mr Rolleston. Mr Andrew believed in the freehold tenure of laud as against leasehold as a man on his own land was likely to do more for that land where he would provide for those who came after him than on land where the teniae was nut secure. He held that uo man would plant oaks for those Yvho might su.ce.d him on ie^eholel laud. He also dealt largely with the two tenures introduced, viz , lease in perpetuity and perpetual lease, holding with the law whereby laud could be eventually made freehold as against the other : tenure, which he held was bad owing to the change in the value of money, lie illustrated this by the instance of a labourer at : ii_ time: only getting a penny a day, money at that lime being scarce, as against wages ! paid now, so that while -i per cent was paid on \aluo of land now ou perpetual lea-e, m course of time the value of money might • change ami the real value of land wouhl ■ not be paid, lie believed that a large (
number of small proprietors of land would be of decided advantage to the state instead of only a few large land owners, but would not object to a large estate here and there being held under certain conditions.
Tie believed in free education, nnd would not like see the standard lowered. Some advoMted the reduction of free education from the sixth t > the fourth standard, but h- protest* d most t-trongly againßt any retrograde step in education, and thought that the sixth stand ud should be maintained. Further enc.uragemnit should be given with regard to scholarship?, and he thought thit the State would do well in increasing the number so thut the brighter scholars of our schools should have every opportunity given them by the State to obtain a higher education, Eiuoation Boards should not be abolished. Friction cert. iniy did tike pla^e between thesa b. is and School Committees, but during the number of years he held a seat on the Board there were no serious difficulties to contend with. Not that there were not times when such did occur, be admitted, but School Committees were in most cases elected ia small communities, whereas in electing men for the Eduo ation Boards the tendency was to get tbe best men to deal with educational matters ; therefore he thought that no change should be made.
LIQUOR QUESTION. lie was not a prohibitionist, but he would aay tbat the Government bill of last session was a sham and a delusion, especially tbat section where half on the roll must vote or the poll be declared void. Iv country districts ifc would in many cases be impossible for half to vote on a specified day, owing to rivers nofc being fordable, bad weather, tides, peculiar localities, and many other causes which country settlers had u> contend with as against tho*e living in moro central and populated distriots. He held that prohibition was class legislation, and class legislation was a thing he waa strongly opp.st-d to on principle. Prohibition dictated to those who did not drink alcoholio liquor by sayiDg they should driDk no more. This he held to be bad, especially to the poorer class of people who in cases of sickness, &0., wou'd be unable to procure the brandy perhaps requisite to treat a patient, and also in the case of their wanting a glasi |of beer. By the arbitrary law they could i not obtain it, whereas the rich man oould always keep a store of liquor on hand ia spite of any law to the contrary. He strongly advocated a bill to prevent the adulteration of liquor, believing that it waa important that the State should interfere and prevent the sale of anything injurious. He quoted the state of Turkey under prohibition both by law and religion, where it was criminal for a man to touch alooholio liquor, and yet the royal house of Turkey registered more deaths through delirium tremens than any other royal house in Europe. railways . He condemned the proposal of the Government to bring the railways again under political control, as they were used as a means of favouring special looalitiea for party purposes, and that would result in a considerable reduction of revenue from the railways. Now under the Commissioners the railways paid 3 per oent, and they wonld in time by good management on their part be made to pay _ per cent on the money £15,000,000 or £16,000,000, whioh the lines had cost the country to oonsfcruot. Uader political control and by being made to serve the interests of the party in power the result would be tbat those who did not use the railway would have to pay for those who did. by taxation to make up the loss of revenue. He had no objection to the Minister of Public Works being on the Board of Commissioners as adviser or in some ex officio sapacity, but would favour nothing thafc would result in the railways again being brought under political control. QUESTIONS. Mr Andrew was asked whether any mm who violated the laws of his country iv disobeying any of the Acts passed by Parliament, such as theßibbifc Act, had any claim to the suffrages of the electors.
Mr Andrew replied certainly not, and had he wilfully at any time set at naught any law passed by Parliament, however bad that law might "dp, he would blush at the thought of ever wishing to represent any constituency in Parliament. He Bpoke at length on thiaquestioD, and pointed out how obnoxious any iuspector could make bima.lf under the Act mentioned to anybody own* ing land, whether there were rabbits on ifc or not, and that he and members of his> family had been insulted by inspectors oa different occasions, but in no case had he violated the law wilfully or knowingly. In answer to many questions on the liquor question, Mr Andrew said thafc he waa not in favour of the bare majority ruling. He thought that municipalities should have control of liquors nnder a similar law to thafc in force in Switzerland.
lie was in favour of the abolition of party government, but by no means agreed with all Sir R bert Stout's views.
Mr Hursthouse moved a vote of thanks to Mr Andrew for his address, whioh was seconded.
Mr G. MaoMahon proposed as an amendment that while thanking Mr Andrew for his address, he be requested to retire from the contest, This was seconded by Mr Trewavas,
Great interruption here took plaoe, many electors speaking against Bueh a resolution being put,
Mr Hursthouse pointed out that fche pro* po ation came from Mr Everett's strongest supporters, and that in fact Mr MaoMahoa had bn ughfc Mr Everett out.
Mr MacMahon replied to the effeot thafc the motive imputed to him by Mr Hursthouse was without foundation, and that he spoke oaly in Mr Andrew's interest.
Mr Andrew said he had been invited to contest this seat, and if he decided to do so it would be on the ground that the other two candidates were on a different line of politics to himself and that he represented the other side which otherwise would nofc be represented in this election.
Mr C. H. King moved as a further amendment " That this meeting thanks Mr Andrew for his address but has no confidence in him as a representative." No one seconded Mr King's amendment. The chairman pufc Mr Mc Mahona amendment to the meeting. Three hands were held up in support ot ifc and it was negatived by a considerable majority.
The original motion with a request thafc Mc Andrew should contest tbe election resulted ia a forest of hands iv its favour, five oaly voting against it.
Mr Andrew thauked those who had expressed their opinion bobh for and against him, and would not definitely state whether he would stand or not until those who were willi. g to support him had consulted afttr the meeting
A vote of thanks to the chairman brought the meeting to a close.
During the address Mr Andrew was frequently applauded, and especially during the question period, when he scored many points against those who were evidently desirous of cornering the possible candidate
Permanent link to this item
REV. J. C. ANDREW AT MOTUEKA., Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XXVII, Issue 273, 20 November 1893
REV. J. C. ANDREW AT MOTUEKA. Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XXVII, Issue 273, 20 November 1893
Using This Item
See our copyright guide for information on how you may use this title.