THE POSTAL CONFERENCE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume IV, Issue 1118, 14 June 1867, Page 6

THE POSTAL CONFERENCE.

The Argus of the 16th ult. thus alludes to the passing of a resolution, in the Victorian Assembly, for the adoption of the report of the Postal Conference:— • Party tactics have triumphed. By 40 to 29 the Assembly has ratified the postal contract concluded at the Conference, not because it will be economical or serviceable to Victoria, but because, if they did not approve of it, the Ministry would resign For seven years, if the Home Government doeßnot ß ave us, will this unfortunate colony be saddled with a costly and insufficient foreign mail service, in order that we may still be governed by the M'Culloch. Ministry. It is possible, although at present the contingency seems remote, that before the contract can come into force, the present Ministry will have censed to exist, but they will leave behind some few legacies; and although amongst these will be found some of the worst and most dangerous precedents which- the history of this cjlony affords, yet we doubt whether for any act the Ministry will be so much blamed as for that course of blundering and incompetency which was consumated by the Tote of Tuesday night.

But it is not only the Ministry that will be censured for this disgraceful business. On no occasion has the Assembly displayed so clearly its utter incapacity to transact the business of the country. Government by party is doubtless a necessity, or at least it is a feature of our political syatezr., of which it is not easy, if indeed it bo desirable, to get rid. On ordinary occasions and on party questions, we do not think members should be blamp-d for sacrificing, to some extent, their individual views and preferences in order to secure united and harmonious action. But there are limits to such concessions ; and we feel sure that we are but expressing the general opinion of the colony when we say that these limits were passed on Tuesday night. "Whether piece goods shall be dutiable or come in free, whether the pollution of streams shall fce dealt with in one bill rather than in another, whether the head of a department shall be screened from the consequences of a blunder which he has made in accepting a contract—on these and similar questions party considerations may not improperly influence or direct the votes of members of Parliament. But when a question of such importance to the community as the extra-colonial mail service for the next nine years is under consideration, we cannot regard it but as something approaching to a breach of trust for any member to vote for committing the colony to a contract, not because it is a beneficial one, but merely because the Government 'vill regard a contrary vote as one of want of confidence. It may be true that there are some members from whom nothing better can be expected. I? there be, as Mr. G. P. Smith declares, some ten or twelve members supporting the Government -who subsist by corruption and jobbery, it is not surprising that for the postal contract, or for any other proposal, the Ministry should secure a majority. But amongst the forty who voted on Tuesday night, we observe gome names for the presence of which we confers our inability to account. Messrs. Bayles, Henty, Kiddell, Macpherson, Wilson, and Pearson, have never, that we have heard, been alleged to belong to the decemviri who.aro said to cling and feed on the carcase of the body politic. They have been, and are reputed to be the respectable make-weights of the ministerial following. No charge of frequenting the land office or trafficking in appointments has been made against them. Ye* they voted for this contract, of which they cannot possibly approve. Can the proverbial clanishness of Scotchmen have anything to do with it? Five of the gentlemen, we have named hail, we believe, from the Land o' Cakes." Can it be that they will support any bargain, however bad, and commit the colony to any arrangement, hewever disastrous, rather than vote against a Binistei whose name begins with Mac ? To whatever influence may be attributed the blind and unreasoning adherence of those respectable Caledonians, we cannot help regarding them as the most dangerous men in tlie Ministerial ranks. They have not the excuse of poverty; they are not low-bred, sordid persons, who could not be expected to resist temptation if it were put in their way. Thoy are men in. their private capacities of some little position and repute, and they save the Ministerial following from the utter contempt with which, without them, it would be almost universally regarded. We firmly believe that none of these gentlemen would descend to the acts of petty plunder which are imputed to 3ome of their brother Ministerialists, but we would ask them where is the difference between sacrificing the public intereafs and squandering the public money on a postal contract;, and mating away with the public estate —tha obj-ct in the one ca=e being to serve the Ministry, and in the other to enrich their supporters ? The debate of Tuesday was only relieved from utter dreariness by tlie laboured defence of the Treasurer and the spirited and unanswerable address of Mr. Langton. By the latter gentleman, the whole case was exhausted. His appeal to the report of the secretary for the Post-ofiice for proof that 2>Tew Zealand will not cease to contribute to the Suez route was, in our opinion, conclusive. The Government saw they had no answer to mako to it, and they at-t-mpted none. What answer is possible, when Mr. Turner states that "Victoria effected >' saving of £10,000 in 18G6 on the postal contract, owing to the increase in the letters from Now Zealand ? Mr. Langton was equally successful in dealing with the Chief Secretary's argument, that three routes would prove of great service in case one should be stopped by war. But it is lamentable to kuow that this speech produced actually no effect at all. In the House of Commons, such a logical at d forceabla appeal could not have been without its results; but it is the misfortune of Victoria that she has in h?r Assembly no party analogous to that which sits below the gangway on both sides of the Hous? of Common o , in the place of such a knot of highminded and cultivated gentlemen, who, while owing Eome allegiance to a party, owe and yield a higher and more constant allegiance to truth and right, we have the set of respectable nonentities, by whose votes tha Ministerial majority was secured. It is well that the public should understand that the interests and destinies of this fine colony are iu the hands of such as these.