THE New Zealand Herald. AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. MONDAY, JUNE 19, 1893.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXX, Issue 9230, 19 June 1893, Page 4

THE New Zealand Herald. AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. MONDAY, JUNE 19, 1893.

We print in another column a letter * from Mr. W. J. Napier in reply to a 1 communication from Mr. Skelton of 1 Paparoa, which we published a few < lays ago. We should not have referred < to the letter in order to discuss the i subjects of contention between these ; jentlemen. Whether Mr. Napier fur- i lively and unfairly kept back from ;he settlers of Paparoa what he ought ! .0 have told them, or whether lie lias ' stated what is not true in regard to : -he numbers of the branch of the Liberal Association there, are matters i with which we do not care to interfere. > But the position which Mr. Napier i ;akea up on behalf of the Liberal i Association, in regard to the " plat- i :orm " recently put forward in its behalf 'in view of the approaching general i slection," is of Importance. " < At the time when Mr. Napier spoke 1 it Paparoa, the Liberal platform was | unbodied in the manifesto issued at Dunedin ; since then, we have had the | Auckland platform proposed by Mr. ' Napier himself a week or two ago. Mr. I tfapier now says that these are not 1 ' working programmes," but are simply I 'enunciatedfor the purpose of educating i jublic opinion." Mr. Napier, in so 1 peaking, can hardly expect anyone « o believe him, as the circumstances go i jowerfully in the direction of showing i hat he is simply enunciating an afterhought. We will briefly state the ] easons which, we think, will impel i myone to come to that conclusion. 1 (1.) Such associations do not exist for i he purpose of putting forward pro- l >osals for the purpose of abstract dis- < lUKaion. They are not mere debating i ocieties. They exist for electoral ( mrposes, and what they adopt as a < ilatform are the objects for which the i tarty is to contend, and which they will J trive to got candidates for Parliament 1 o agree to. When a party platform is j poken of in England everyone knows i hat it means certain objects which the >arty are to combine to got passed into aw. ' (2.) The Dunedin platform, which has i teen before the public for a consider- s ,ble time, and which is much the same i ,s that adopted in Auckland, has always 1 >een held up as the objects of the party, t ?ime after time hive we discussed it > .s showing what the party aimed at. < "he National Association have always t epresented it as embodying the party > .iras ; and yet never till now has any- 1 >ody said that the Dunedin programme t md the Auckland programme are I nerely the manifestoes of a debating t ooiety, and are not intended to guide I >ractical legislation. The fact was c hat they never thought of the idea till c dr. Seddon started it the other day. If i he suggestion had been made before, t dr. Napier would have resented it. The c jiberal Association was,in truth, double- t aced. When Mr. Napier went to the 1 lountry, he said nothing about land na- s ionalisation, the State taking possession t >f all mines and running the steamers, t ,he State securing the unearned incre- « nent, and so on. These things were t cept for the cities : quite a different i ,one was adopted in the country. Does r . Ie think that the country settlers are t iucli flats and " goslings" as not to find ■ t ihis out, and to duly take it into ao- a :ount 1 ■ s (3.) At the meeting of the Premier with the members of - the Liberal Asso- i

ciation a few evenings ago, lie was polite enough to say that he thought the programme which had been put forward a few days before was merely the prepositions of a debating society for discussion. But Mr. Seddon did not believe that himself, as we shall show. The phrase used was merely a fashion of speech, to let the Association down easily, and was inconsistent with the whole of the rest of his address. His first words were that the programme was a pill which they had presented to him to swallow, but that he declined to swallow it. This was speaking frankly and truly of the way in which the programme presented itself to his mind, Would he have spoken in this way of a programme containing a set of abstract resolutions on, "subjects which the gradual evolution," and so on, which Mr. Napier now says is all that is meant. (4.) Mr. Seddon's first, possibly somewhat unguarded, statement about the programme being a pill which it was sought to compel him to swallow is proof that he did not regard the platform as being meant as a manifesto of abstract declarations " for the purpose of educating public opinion," etc. But if anything further were required to show how Mr. Soddon regarded it, it can be found in the whole tenor of his succeeding speech, in which he so strongly recommended moderation and caution, and stated that these were the watchwords of the Ministry. These were put as against the programme of the Liberal Association, showing that ho did not really regard their proposals as debating society propositions, but as political objects to be attained. (5.) When Mr. Napier presented the programme to the Liberal Association about a fortnight ago, he did not say a word about its contents being merely abstract propositions for discussion in the future in the distance,-when "the gradual evolution of modern society" should " bring them forward for treatment." lie knew that they would be taken as the manifesto of the Association for the general election, yet he never spoke about their being merely for a debating society. No political association, seeking to have an active influence in politics, would encumber itself with abstract resolutions which could not do it any good. The platform was drawn up by a sub-committee of which Mr. Napier was chairman, this sub-committee having been appointed some time ago (we use the words under which the committee was appointed) "to :lraw up the programme, in view of the nminggeneral election." Could anything be more specific as a declaration that ibis was a political manifesto ? Is it not ' plain that it was intended as a pill" tor the candidates who were to come out under the auspices of the Liberal Association? These are the reasons wo have for >. saying that this idea of the programme ; aeing merely proposals for discussion is i in after-thought, put forward by Mr. , Seddon, and now eagerly adopted by Mr. Napier, who was responsible for it, ( in behalf of the Liberal Association. /Vt the meeting in which the programme ivas adopted, the Association made no ' irrangeraents for discussing the items )f the programme. They had been dis- j :ussed before. What the meeting did ■vas to " adopt" them as a manifesto for 1 'he general election. The other busi- 1 less was political and electoral of the ■ nost practical kind. A resolution * :ongratulating Mr. G. L. Peacocke | m being appointed a member of ' ;he University College Council was | idopted. Mr. Peacocke is the forenost advocate of land nationalisation, [f he had his way all the land in New Zealand would be nationalised during ;he coming session. He holds it as a abject of which lie is convinced, and tvould bring into force at once, if he :ould. The other business was, making irrangements to put Liberal voters on ;he electoral roll, and so on. Is working the electoral roll a function of a iebating society ? Then again, if the whole programme s swept out of existence as the platform >f a political party, and passes into the imbo of questions for discussion in " the jradual evolution of modern society," what in the name of wonder is the programme of the Liberal Association ["hey had better bo quick. The elections are coming on. The Premier has sicked his foot through the drum they lave been beating, and they will have ;o get a now instrument. They will lave to compound a now pill. Perhaps tome people will say that they have ilready declared what their programme 3, namoly, "Ditto to Mr. Seddon." There are many other points in Mr. , Napier's letter upon which we might ipeak. He says that in advocating a and tax "so as to ensure to the State ; 'he future unearned increment," he neans that that is " merely the land law i >f England as it has existed with slight ; nodifications since the Norman con- ! luest." We refrain from showing up ;he hollowness of this in mere pity, and ndeed because everyone can see it. 3ut we conclude with again asking, 1 nVhat is the programme of the Liberal J Association, "in view of the approach- , ng general election 1" :