THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 1900.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVII, Issue 11534, 20 November 1900, Page 4

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 1900.

When Mr. Fowlds ceases to rely so implicitly upon academic remedies for the varied ills to which human society is liable, he is likely to become an influential and trusted representative. Although a novice in legislative work, and still enthusiastic enough to believe that the whole Parliamentary system can be purged and purified by a few casual amendments, he has shown during his first session an ability to grasp the salient points of the political position, and an earnest desire to do that which he thinks best for the city, the province, and the colony at large, which fully entitle him to respect and congratulation. It is not to be expected that everybody will agree with all his opinions or endorse all his actions ; but we believe that all impartial people who have followed the records of the session and watched his patriotic conduct on various occasions, in the face of strong party pressure, will approve the sympathetic tone of the crowded meeting of his constituents which he addressed last night. If Mr. Seddon really expects to thrust from Parliament every independent supporter of his Administration, he will have to do some hard electioneering in Auckland City, for the gauntlet has been fairly flung down to him by Mr. Fowlds, and the electors heard impeachment after impeachment with cheerful equanimity. In fact, after his last night's speech, we have some hesitation in indicating Mr. Fowlds as a Seddon supporter. When he frees himself from the hope that an Elective Executive Bill and a Nine Hours Legislation Bill and an Increase of Members Bill will break the evil influence of our present Premier, we rarjy expect him to take vigorous pjst in those well-established and Ifotoric methods by which alone it is possible to end the intolerable dictation now oppressing the colony in general, but the North Island in particular. The relief to be obtained from these purely experimental processes must necessarily be doubtful. Whereas the whole British world is governed under the system which Mr. Fowlds declares to be mainly responsible for our New Zealand misgovernment ; only because of the docility of members generally is it possible for our ever-recurring local injustices to be perpetrated. A single session has taught him that the Upper House fills an important and necessary part in our legislative methods; another session or two may equally convince him that there is use and need for other parts of the legislative machinery which now seem irrelevant and objectionable to the eager Radical doctrinaires.

i Our readers will find in other columns Mr. Fowlds' account of his Stewardship and summary of the principal work done and left undone during the session. They will readily see that our member is no ; Coriolanus, and does not shrink from expatiating upon his good works to his fellow citizens. At the same . time, it must be acknowledged that it is highly necessary, in these democratic days, that a member should set his light on a hill. But while there are endless topics for renewed discussion and criticism in the many Bills to which he refers, we would point out to every elector that a triple thread of continuity connects them all: the political tyranny being established at Wellington, the industrial jealousy against Auckland, the deliberate administration of public business for the benefit of the South Island and to the detriment of the North. Upon these matters he speaks openly and without equivocation, more than justifying the seemingly harsh comments which we have been repeatedly compelled to make. He derides the idea that there is any such division between Government and Opposition as can be designated by the terms "Liberal" and "Conservative." Many Oppositionists, he tells us, are more " Liberal" than a number of Government supporters; we are governed not by principle, but by expediency. To hamper the trade and handicap the industrial development of Auckland, to fatten the South Island and to starve the North ; to crush all opposition and throttle all independence and remove all constitutional safeguards and concentrate all power at Wellington: these are the tendencies of the powerful Administration which the people of Auckland and of the North Island so blindly and infatuatedly support. The party has no power, asserts Mr. Fowlds; it is the Premier ; let us have elected executives and we shall be happy. And yet, in every other part of the British world, such hostile critics would not hesitate to say that a vote of non-confidence ought to end the situation. Unless Mr. Fowlds alters very much indeed he will be compelled by unavoidable circumstances to say that himself before he comes before us for re-election.

Mr. Fowlds objects to party government, but by his own showing there never was greater need for party than in New Zealand at this momentous epoch. We want a party of Justice, of Equity, of Honour, to

shatter to pieces this dominant patty of Injustice, of Iniquity and of Binhonour. He tells us that Southern members were surprised at the way in which their island was favoured in the railway Estimates; we cannot think that; all our fellow colonists across the straits wish to continue this system of favouritism, may we not justly V t say of public robbery ; surely among them are many who would wish to do justice to* the North, even as many of us would wish to do justice to them. Here in Auckland, the public is beginning to realise the continual danger to which we are subject by the malicious envy and hatred of powerful officialism. From end to end of New Zealand every honest man is awakening to the terrible fact that we are governed by an unscrupulous autocracy upheld by the most corrupting influences and the most demoralising means. The most trenchant comment which we could make on Mr. Fowlds' position, for his stubborn opposition to, and present impeachment of, the dangerous and perfidious Public Revenues Amendment Bill, more than clear him of any responsibility for the £40 bonus —whatever may be &aid of his mode of dispensing it—is that while seeing and hating the evils from which the country surfers, he is not ready to force the matter to a head. He pins his hope on an elective Executive, and not upon the only thing which can alter things, an uprising of public opinion and the sweeping away of the disreputable elements in Parliamentary life. That uprising is surely coming. His own unhesitating condemnations, the sympathetic feeling of his audience, the hum of indignation which can be heard throughout the land, all show that the reign of Seddonism is nearing an end. But we would wish to see its death-blow given it by honest and capable men, who will build again the fair fame of New Zealand; among whom Mr. Fowlds, if he chooses, may easily be one.