WAITAKI ELECTION. THE NOMINATION.

North Otago Times, Volume XXIII, Issue 1160, 25 December 1875, Page 2

WAITAKI ELECTION. THE NOMINATION.

The nomination of candidates for the representation of Waitalti in the new Parliament took place yesterday in the Court-house, T. W. Parker, Esq., Beturning Officer, presiding. The usual formalities having been gone through, some delay occurred owing to the proposers of the different candidates wishing to gire each other precedence, in order that their man should not hare to speak first. This had the curious effect of some of the proposers and seconders changing places, and nominating an opponent of the man of their choice t Sereral candidates besides the four who really contest the election were proposed,

including Mr George Sumpter, Mr Andrew Mowat, and Mr James Grave, who all declioed to allow the nomination of themselves to be received. The following nominations wero made in due form ; — Mr William J. Steward — proposed by Mr M'Nab, and seconded by Mr Robert Wilson. Mr Thomas W. Hislop — pcoposed by Mr Dunlop, and seconded by Mr A. Mowat. Mr Joseph O'Mr jgher — proposed by Mr J. Booth, and seconded by Mr T. Procter. Mr Samuel E. Shrimslti — proposed by Mr A. Rodgera, and seconded by Mr Amos. There were loud calls of " Steward " and " Hislop," and the Returning Officer said that according to custom the old member had tbe choice as to time of speaking. After consulting with Mr. Hislop, Mr. Steward said that as Mr Hislop preferred that they should address the meeting in the order of nomination he would waive his right and give that gentleman any advantage which he might derive from hearing first what he, Mr. Steward, had to say. As there would be soon another opportunity of addresssng them more at length bis remarks would be very brief. Had he consulted his own interests he should not have consented to be a candidate for their suffrages, but he could not refuse the request of so many friends, so many gentlemen connected with every interest in the town and the country, that he should again place his services at their disposal. He then said that they all knew the line of policy which he had supported and would if returned continue to support, viz., the Unity of the Colony, and the substitution for Provincial institutions of a syatem of local government, less expensive and nearer to the people, under which they would have the administration of a fair share of the revenue for local works. He did not believe that ten legislative bodies were required to govern the Colony, and being firmly persuaded that the step taken la»t f yew would never be reversed, he held that the task to which the new House should devote its energies was to devising the best possible system of local Government under the new order of things. He believed Insular Separation to be inpracticable, and even though a reeolution in its favor couid be carried, ths party in which Sir George Grey and Mr Macandrew had coalesced, would split upon the question of the Southern Land Fund, for the reason certain North Islnnd politicians favored Separation was avowedly because they wished to rescind the compact of 1856, and to share the Land Fund of the Southern Provinces, which, was secured to them by the Abolition Bill. He knew some differed from him upon this question, but they need not qnarrel about that, he should feel no unfriendly feeling towards any man who voted tor those who would support an opposite policy to that which he supported, but he hoped that in any event the electorate would not return two men of diametrically opposite vie jfs, as in that case*, when party fighting was going on, it was hopeless to expect them to work as cordially together for the district, or as effectually, as would be the case if they were both in the same boat. Finally, he had no intention to canvas for votes, if he were returned ho should work hard for them, as he had done before, and if others were returned there would certainly be no harm done to him. In answer to questions, Mr Steward stated that he was in favor of Secular State Compulsory Education, but thought that there were instances where nearly a whole population belonged to a particular church, which did not allow their children to attend state schools, in which those belonging to that j church ought not to be compelled to contribute towards the cost of state schools. It would be a very expensive thing to get important bills printed in all the newspapers. It would have cost a great deal more to print the Abolition Bill in that way than it cost the country to print the Deceased Wife's Sister Bill. Mr Hislop had come forward at considerable personal sacrifice, bnt ho felt it his duty to do so at a crisis in the history of the Colony such as had never occurred before, and probably would not occur again. He held that the Abolition party of last session had broken the great fundamental rule underlying all Constitutional Government by not consulting the people before determining upon constitutional changes. Whether the Bill was a good one or not, the people should have been consulted, to secure its adaptability Jto all parts of the country. It ought not to have been sent to them with, the Government stamp upon it. The Government organs had tried to throw dust by averring that the people were in favor of the change, but the people had not been allowed to say whether they were or not. In the United States no constitutional change could be made without the sanction of two-thirds of both Houses, and there must also be two-thirds of the States (in effect; the same as the Provincial Councils) in its favor. But as to the Abolition Bill itself. It was a. pity those who supported what they called the Unity of the Colony did not read a few sections of the Bill. If they did it would damn it, as the electors would see at once by what processes the power was being tiiken out of their hands. Mr Steward had said he was in favor of an elective Hsrbor Board. Surely the elective principle then should apply to other Boards. But what did they End in the Abolition Bill ? Why that all lands now Tested in the Superintendent were to be vested in the Governor. What was to become of their Education Reserves ? Why they woe to be dealt with by Education Boards nominated by the Governor. Did they like that? Then they had no scheme of local governtment before the country; they wero asked to choose between the Provinces and Blank — nothing. They ought to be told what they were goinp to have in their place. Mr Richardson had been compelled to admit that the Local Government Bill was only meant as a temporary measure ; and Mr Stevens, a supporter of the Government, went in for Boards of Works nominated by the Governor -^Central Legislation and Nominee Boards. He did not think that was a substitute for the present syatem which they were likely to approve of. Since he (Mr Hiilop) had determined to come forward, numbers of persons had come to him and told him it would injure his business, but he found on enquiry that, strange to say, theie people, who had taken no interest in his business before, happened fo be opposed to his political viewi. In answer to questions, Mr Hislop said he would vote for the Repeal of the Abolition Act, if a motion to thnt effect were brought forward ; but he would not bind himself to support Provincialism a* it was. He would not be in favor of a nominee Board of Works, at Duaedin. Would support a scheme for the financial separation of tbe two islands — two States with one Colony, Separation was in his opinion just at practicable as the dissolution of an ordinary partnership. He would leave it to North Island members to decide whether Provincialism should be continued in the North Island. Mr O'Meagher had no doubt the majority were surprised to see him there at a candidate, but he himself was not aware that be should be so till twenty minutes before the meeting. The statement of the last speaker that separation of the two islands was as easy as the dissolution of «n ordinary partnership was utter nonsense, if, indeed, it was not worse. An ordinary partnership might be made or dissolved by word of mouth; but constitutional matters could not be dealt with in that wa r. He was entirely in accord with Mr Steward on this question, and would take an opportunity of more fully explaining his views on another occasion. He could not imagine that this district would lend its support to any attempt to revive Provincialism, as he knew — and he scarcely thought they could have forgotten — how for years their roads were neglected, and the complaints they had made only went in at one ear of the Provincial Government and out at the other. They had done better siuce they petitioned for

a County. The Provincial Government took alarm and began to give them a little more attention ; for if they b«d not, they uw that Otago would lose the Oamaru district as Canterbury had lost Timaru and Gladstone. When they aslced where the money had gone, the answer was in roads to the goldfields. Well ; why, then, when the goldfields revenue came in, Lad not a share of it been spent in this district? A lot of their money had been spent in deepening Dunedin harbor and in the Port Chalmers railway. He would not hm.ro consented to stand unless Mr Steward had done so; but he thought the constituency should not send up two new men, nor should they disfranchise themselves, as they practically would do, by sending two men of opposite views. He (Mr O'Meagher) would support a Shire system, so that they should have a Shire embracing the country from the Waitaki to 'the Horse Range, with the administration of their own monies and the Government subsidies. As to their Education Reserves if Mr Hislop had only read them the provisions of the Abolition Act (clause 10 read) they would have seen that these were not to vest in the Governor, as Mr Hislop had stated, but were absolutely vested, immediately on Abolition taking effect, in the Education "Board of the Province. So far as he was personally concerned he was indifferent as to the result, but he thought that it was the duty of some one to come forward, and not let the Provincial party ride roughshod over the constituency. In answer to questions, Mr O'Meagher said that he would not accept the Solicitor-General-ship. He was in favor of the unity of the Colony. He did not think separation could be effected as easily aa in the case of Victoria and New South Wales. He did not remember whether Mr. Whitaker and others had tried to effect it in 1865 or 1866 and failed. Was not in favor of sweeping away the Upper House altogether. Looked upon ibas a constitutional safeguard. Thought it should bo partly elective and partly nominative. Did not bold with one man upsetting the wishes of the majority of the community. The members of the South Island outnumbered those of the North and could hold their own. He could not tell of any damage that would bo done to the South by the Abolition Bill. Was not the stalking horse of any man. He was too proud to accept such a position. He stood in his own right as an elector. Mr. Rodgers, as Mr. Shrimski's proposer, said that that gentleman was not present. He had spoken to Mr. Shrimski about the Abolition Bill, and be simply said he did not understand it, and until what machinery it was proposed to substitute was more definitely defined, he preferred to remain with what they knew they had than what they didn't know they were going to bare. This ho would Bay, that if they returned Mr. Shrimski he would work hard for them and would do them as good seivice as any man they could send. A Ehow of hands was then taken and resulted as follows. Steward ... 22 Hislop ... 35 O'Meagher 24 Shrimski ... 30 A poll was demanded on behalf of Mr. Steward and appointed for the 10th January, and after a vote of thanks to the Returning Officer the meeting dispersed.