MR. CARLETON'S LETTER.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XI, Issue 4048, 3 November 1874, Page 1 (Supplement)

MR. CARLETON'S LETTER.

To the Editor of the Herald. "PerituTTO p&rcito chart®." Sir, —The public will receive with great satisfaction your intimation that the columns of the Herald are open to the free discussion of constitutional questions. That is just what we want, and I hope the opportunity will be eagerly seized by the powerful and intelligent party of Provincialists who have hitherto been silent, and excused their silence by the assertion that the Press was closed against them. The newspaper discussion will, I hope, be now maintained on both sides vigorously, as a fore-runner to equally vigorus debate on the open platforms of public meetings hereafter. own opinions and sympathies are entirely with Sir George Grey's memorandum, and with your permission I shall proceed to shew why Mr. Carleton's letter has not shaken them. I will talcc liis paragraphs scvlcttijiiy and make tlie reference as brief as possible. 1. " Paper constitutions from the time of the Abbe Sieyes have been little prized." Does Mr Carleton ignore the constitution of one of the greatest of modern nations—the United States? —in defence of which men shed their blood like water not a dozen years an-o. Does he ignore the several State Constitutions of this great Federation, many of which have stood the v> ear and tear of centuries, and to all of which the people, from the Atlantic to the Pacific, are attached with the deepest affection ? Furthermore, : can Mr. Carleton give any single instance of ) m unwritten Constitution in any free country except Great Britain ? I know of none myself, and do not think there is such a thing in existence. 2. " Tlie warning to the Governor, tiiat

any acts performed by him in excess or in violation of his powers are unconstitutional, seems superfluous." Is Mr. Carleton not aware that the political history of New Zealand abounds with examples of such violations, controverting the spirit of the Constitution as to the suffrage, the representation of constituencies, the number of representatives, and now, as we have just discovered, notably in the appropriation to local uses of the revenues obtained from land purchased with imperial money on certain rigidlydefined conditions? I refer, of course, to the £10, Of 1 sent in 1545 to Sir G. Grey to buy up native lands, on condition that they should be sold and the proceeds appropriated in the same way until the whole of the native title was extinguished in New Zealand —conditions deliberately violated by the Waste Lands Revenue Appropriation Act of ISSS. Is it not equally a violation of the Constitution to contemplate changes in its j radical principles, without first submitting them to the full consideration and matured opinion of the people whom these changes most concern ? 3. "The Superintendency elections have been the bane of the colony, fertile in little save heart-burnings," &c. So says Mr. Carleton. Others say that they have helped to keep alive the fires of political energy, and to instruct the people in the proper conduct of their own affairs. But Mr. Carleton's arguments on this head would apply to all freedom—all popular self-government—all dissent in religion as well as in politics. He would have a beautiful uniformity with a C;esar to crown the edifice — something after the Napoleon 111. style, I presume all strengh outwardly, but hollowness and decay within. Self-government and agitation are inseparable. No means have yet been discovered of preserving liberty and saving a nation from the perils of class-government without them. 4. "We acquire thereby the privilege of making by-laws (see Sir John Packingtou's despatch concerning the Constitution), fo' which we have to pay most heavily through the additional taxation required for the maintenance of provincial institutions." My reply is that I don't care two straws what Sir .Trtlin "PneL-i'ncton. who knew nothing about New Zealand or its people, said or did not say. "What I want to know is the opinion of the New Zealand people themselves, expressed after full consideration, through a body of representatives elected for the pur-

pose, and for that purpose alone. As to the cost of maintaining provincialism. I challenge Mr. Carleton to shew how the province of Auckland, for example, will be benefited one farthing by its abolition. To my mind the Provincial Government is the representative of thrift, and the General Government exactly the reverse. Does anyone ever hear the word economy mentioned in connection with the latter, and would it not sound strangely out of place if they did - 5. Mr. Carleton speaks of provincial Legislatures as embodying " the petty tyranny of upstarts," and that he has "again and again heard a desire expressed for a good strong despotism as the only sure refuge from the ranks of incompetent legislation." I can only say that my own circle of friends entertain very different opinions. They regard the General Assembly, with its absurd pretention, ostentatious extravagance, and determined attempt to set up itself as supreme and its service as a separate " caste," as being the really upstart branch of our system. They have quite as much faith in the ultimate judgment, and more in the honest intentions of the people at large than in those of any possible Ccesar or despot at present in the market. Nor can I forget that " Ciesars" have always proved themselves from their first appearance on the historical stage as the great corrupters of a nation, and the ruthless repressors of whatever was adverse to their personal interests, be the cost what it might, to all the higher and nobler interests of the nation.

6. "Who are the New Zealand statesmen who owe their statesmanship to training in Provincial Councils?" Will Mr. Carleton tell me one who does not, and, if so, in what other school these exceptional statesmen have been trained ?

7. Is it not a fact that public affairs are still being conducted by "the old hands?" asks Mr. Carleton. To which I reply that there never was a period in the history of the colony when the contrary was more strikingly the case. S. "In Auckland, provincialism has succeeded in wasting the public estate." The General Government, and not the Provincial, is responsible for the Waste Lands Revenue Appropriation Act of 1858, if Mr. Carleton refers to that. If not, I am at a loss to know to what he can refer. 9. "Do we not see them in the Assembly reducing Parliamentary Government to a farce by the introduction of a third party into the House—the Superintendents' party ?" Does Mr. Carleton, then, hold that Parliamentary Government in England is reduced to a farce because there is a third party—the Irish members—as distinct in it as the Superintendents' are here ? Besides, why should the interests of the Superintendents be opposed to those of the Colonial Legislature so long as the latter confines itself to colonial, and does not interfere in provincial matters ? We know, as a matter of experience, that the Assembly began the aggressions, and that, until it did so, the Provincial Governments worked in harmony with it. We know also that it is by the expenditure of borrowed money—by that alone, and not by any belief in its superior wisdom or confidence in its superior honesty of purpose — that the Assembly has obtained its present influence. On the contrary, its whole career has been one of waste, war, and extravagance, perilling the credit and safety of the colony, and depriving the thrifty Provincial Governments of the share of the revenue they ought to have to carry on the important duties entrusted to them. Sir George Grey knows of no instance of a freely-elected Legislature being suppressed without violence or revolution. Mr.. Carleton asks, is this really the case ? With his large historical reading, the question should be unnecessary; and. he will find it impossible, I believe, to adduce a single instajice. "Rotten boroughs and other

nuisances " are. analogous. They aro not "freely elected Legislatures" as Provincial Legislatures undoubtedly are. Finally, what ia Mr. Carleton driving at? "We all admit the present system hollow, and a sham,—that it isneitlier federal nor central, and agree that a change is inevitable. He does not tell us what, in his opinion, that change should be. Sir George Grey does, and 1 agree with Sir George for this reason, if for no other, that I have no faith in the Government of any cl&ss, high or low, nor of any individual, however able. History, and English history especially, tells me how such power is certain to be abused in the interests of the class into whose hands it has fallen. In the long run, the verdict of an intelligent people - and no others are fit for self-government —will be more honest, more disinterested, and more sound, than the verdict of any particular class. Mr. Carleton seems to think that the mere election of a man as a representative changes his nature and endows liim with new and millennial qualities. Ido not think so. I believe that constituencies have only done half their duty when the election is over. The equally important duty of watching their representatives remains to be performed. That, to my mind, can not bo done with any purely central body in a country like New Zealand. For that reason, among a hundred others, I differ from Mr. Carleton, and have much pleasure in signing myself a very firm PiIOVINCIALIST.