MR. STAFFORD AND MR. J. C. CRAWFORD.

Nelson Examiner and New Zealand Chronicle, Volume XXVI, Issue 146, 5 December 1867, Page 9

MR. STAFFORD AND MR. J. C. CRAWFORD.

[From the Nelson Examiner, November 26.]

• We copied a fortnight ago from a southern paper, a telegram furnished by its Wellington correspondent, which stated that Mr. Stafford had called upon Mr. J. C. Crawford, the Eesident Magistrate at Wellington, to resign either his office or his seat in the Legislative Council ; and the motive assigned for this uncalled-for proceeding was that Mr. Crawford had voted against the Government on the Public Debts Bill. While we thought the story might have had a shadow of truth, we expected to find the version given of it greatly over-coloured — never supposing that Mr. Stafford would be so deficient in tact, after tbe snubbing be received last session for his treatment of Otago, as to place himself and his Government again in a false position. But we ought to have remembered that some men will never learn wisdom from experience, for we find that all tbe humiliation which the Government suffered from its Otago folly last session, has not served to prevent Mr. Stafford from courting a hornets' nest, that will sting him in tbe next one.

We find, contrary to our expectations, that Mr. Stafford has really written to Mr. Crawford, pointing out to that gentleman the incompatibility of his holding a Government appointment and at the same time having a seat in the Legislative Council ; urging that the expediency of the practice has been questioned in Parliament, and politely requesting to know whether he would elect to retain his office or his seat. For this piece of information we are indebted to the Independent, which states that Mr. Crawford, in reply, informed Mr. Stafford that whenever the possession of his seat becomes " incompatible " with the retention of his office, he will resign the former, but that in the meantime he shall continue to hold both positions. It will be necessary to give a few words of explanation, to make the case thoroughly understood. Mr. Crawford, in the exercise of his duty as a member of the Upper Chamber of the Legislature, voted against the Public Debts Bill, and thereby contributed to the embarrassment which the Government experienced during the last week of the session. The position taken by Mr. Stafford is, that Mr. Crawford, being a salaried officer, has no right to opinions on public affairs ; and whether he considers the measures presented by the Government are good or evil, he is bound to support them; that in accepting the office he holds, he has forfeited his independence as a legislator, and henceforth must be the tool and slave of the Government. That such are Mr. Stafford's opinions is perfectly clear. His plea of " incompatibility," and reference to the " expediency " of a public servant holding a seat in the Legislature having been questioned by Parliament, is a piece of refined hypocrisy. If Mr. Crawford were the only salaried public servant Bitting in the Council— if he were the only Eesident Magistrate there, Mr. Stafford might have found an excuse for his attempt to coerce a gentleman possessed of independent feelings to forego his opinions and become a creature of his Government ; but seeing that there are other public servants in the Council to whom no such intimation of the " incompatibility " of their dual position has been given,

and that in the late dead-lock on the Public Debts Bill the Eesident Magistrate of Dunedin, Mr. Cheetham Strode, was telegraphed for by tbe Government to come up to Wellington in all haste, and help to convert the majoriiy in the Council against the Government into a minority, it is quite clear that Mr. Stafford's letter to Mr. Crawford is nothing but an attempted intimidation, with theobject of destroyingtbe independence of certain members of the Legislature who may hold opinions opposed to his own. This becomes still more apparent, when we remember that the bill brought forward by Mr. Eeynolds last session to provide that no paid officer of the Government should sit as a member of either House of the Legislature, was opposed by Mr. Stafford. We shall be curious to see the upshot of this new imbroglio. Will Mr. Stafford dare to dismiss Mr. Crawford as Eesident Magistrate at Wellington, because he conscientiously opposed an Act which he considered would entail on the colony a sacrifice of half a million of money to enrich stockjobbers and speculators ? If not, and Mr. Crawford be permitted to retain his office, what a miserable display of littleness and pique, so unworthy of a statesman, will Mr. Stafford have been guilty of for no adequate object? The conduct of Mr. -Stafford in courting rebuffs, reminds us of Mawworm's love of persecution : — " Parsecute me ! parsecute me ! I love to be parsecuted." It is pitiful to see Mr. Stafford roar his usefulness by indulging in such pranks as the one just stated, for no better purpose than to feed his indomitable vanity and arrogance. That the Legislature of the colony will passively submit to be told, that he is " God, and King, and Law," we cannot believe ; and unless the treatment of Mr. Crawford becomes next session the subject of warm debate in both Houses, the members will be greatly wanting in self-respect. Since the above was written, we have seen a Wellington paper which states tbat Mr. Crawford has resigned his seat in the Legislative Council. We are exceedingly sorry tbat Mr. Stafford has so far succeeded in intimidating Mr. Crawford, but his success will not make matters better for him when Parliament shall next meet. ,