THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 18, 1896.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXIII, Issue 10082, 18 March 1896, Page 4

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 18, 1896.

The speech of the Premier at Nelson whs, lie says, addressed not to the Nelson people only, but to the colony. As such it might have been expected to prove ii politisal manifesto, from which information might be gathered as to the direction intended to be taken in the future development of the Ministerial policy. As it is, it partakes of the usual characteristic of Mr. Seddon's addresses-that is, an attack on the tactics and general wrong-doing of his political opponents. Oddly enough, his principal charge of this kind is, that the Conservatives, or National Association, or (in more general terras) his opponents, had been using private moneys for the purpose of obtaining political support. Whatever condemnation may attach to such a course of procedure, it is at least less reprehensible than the using of public moneys for a like purpose. Those so condemned have not the opportunity of starting cooperative public works, and giving favours in this way to large numbers of voters, nor yet of conciliating a district for electoral purposes by conferring on it public works of this kind. They are precluded from utilising the machinery of the State for promoting their private political ends, but it somewhat ill becomes those who have such powers, and by universal repute are credited with using them with these objects in view, to complain that their opponents are reduced to the necessity of falling back on their own resources, and making use of their private means for what they consider public objects. These efforts of his opponents of which Mr. Seddon made complaint were based on arguments to which he does not deign to reply, but he assumes that their objects are merely for promoting land monopoly and private interests in general. What possible benefit can be derived from playing to the galleries in such statements as that "such tactics were an insult to the people of New Zealand," and should be resented as such ; that it was "an insult to the people to say that they were to abandon their political principles and be dragged at the chariot-wheels of a select few who desired to govern the colonies in their own interests and not in the interests of the people V To tickle the, ears of the groundlings by such appeals to their uninstructed prejudices is hardly worthy of the Premier who appears to have scrupulously avoided in his speech all grappling with the arguments that have been freely used against the policy and administration of his Government.

Mr. Seddon informed his audience that he lmd authentic information of the formation of a combination between Sir Robert Stout and Captain Russell, and proceeded to attack the land monopolising policy likely to result. Whether such combination eventuates or otherwise, it would require something more than the dictum of Mr. Seddon to lead the public to believe that Sir Robert Stout could become identified with a policy of land monopoly. The views of the senior member for Wellington on all things relating to the settlement of the people on the land, and the general welfare of the masses, aro too well known, and have been too long familiar to the people of New Zealand to leave any doubt on that subject. The result of the Christchurch election still rankles in the minds of Ministers, and every effort is made to minimise its significance. The Premier ventures as his explanation that the result of the voting showed that there were 8000 Liberals to 3500 Conservatives. But he does not seem to recognise the fact that of Liberals, whatever the numbers may have been, a majority must have voted for the candidate who was of all the most explicitly denounced by Ministers, and whose standing second on the poll and over the head of the Ministerial candidate, wasthestrongest expression of condemnation of the Government which its erstwhile supporters could have given. On the old subject of the fluctuation of population and of capital, the speaker refers to the efflux of population under the Atkinson regime, altogether ignoring the fact that it was the period of boom in Australia, when population was being drawn from every corner. But in referring to tho anticipated census returns a more curious oversight is made, for in stating the increase of population for the past live years, Mr. Seddon takes credit for a number only representing the natural increase of

the population by births, on the assumption, it may be sussed, that the natural prolificity of the population has been maintained owing to the beneficent irifluenM of the Seddoi administration. Whether capital lus or has not been influenced unfavourably so as to be drawn from the colony might be tested rather by the extent to Winch it has been put into new enterprises, than by the rate of interest available. For a low rate of interest does not show a surplus of money looking for investment more than it shows that there is not a healthy demand for money for investments that should assist the development of the colony.

Relative to the tariff proceedings of last session and the fiscal questions generally, Mr. Seddon makes assertions as to his desires for free trade among the colonies which he can very readily put to the proof. He deplores, of course, the action of the Opposition, in fact of almost the whole House, in sitting on the reciprocity proposals of the Colonial Treasurer. A little consideration might have shown the Ministry the impracticability of partial reciprocity, and the story ot the attempts made to cultivate partial freetrade with Canada and South Australia presented as ludicrous an episode as the colony has seen for a good many years. But if the Premier is prepared, as he says, to throw open the ports of the colony to the other colonies, there is nothing on their part standing in the way. New South Wales has already proceeded on those lines, in the assurance that it will reap the benefits whether the other colonies follow on the same lines or otherwise. Free trade between the colonies is a feasible thing, partial reciprocity is not, and the last fiasco in that line should be instructive in relation to similar projects in the future. With regard to borrowing the Government is not favourable, and it is. It is quite disposed to raise money for the purchase of native lands, and other lands for settlement, to lend to settlers at a cheap rate of interest and to make roads. But it is not disposed to borrow money for political railways for finding employment, and for purchasing support, these reprehensible methods being only fit for the opponents of Mr. Seddon's Government. With the exception of measures for the regulation of clubs, for putting a poll-tax of £100 011 Chinese; and the expression of a determination to have nothing to do with the Japanese Treaty, Mr. Seddon refrains from throwing light on the future policy of the Government, contenting himself mainly with an exposition of the tactics of his political opponents, and their incapacity for blinding the public as to the meritorious acts of the Government for the salvation of the country.