CURRENT TOPICS.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1290, 19 November 1896, Page 34

CURRENT TOPICS.

THE WELLINGTON SEATS

The proceedings at Thomas’ Hall last week were of the character of the referendum. It was a referendum on a small scale, applied inside the limits of a party organisation for the purpose of clearing the way for a straight vote at the ballot boxes. It was a very practical idea, the only method of attaining an object which at every election has proved very difficult of attainment. The Liberal League, was embarrassed, as usual, by the presence of too many candidates. It hit upon the sensible notion of giving them all a hearing, they on their side, with one exception, agreeing to abide by the result of the voting. There was only a rough and ready test of the qualification of voters. “ Are you of the right colour ?” It was the question not put to anyone, hut determined by the knowledge of those in charge. As the greal majority of those present were of the right colour, the test was not difficult to apply, and the result may therefore be depended upon. It lias given the party two candidates, who, with Mr Hutcheson, who has been chosen unanimously as the Liberal candidate, gives the Liberal Party a ticket of three, for the three seats, for the first time in its history in Wellington. Mr Fisher secured first place, of the two nominations open, not so much by his speech as by his strong personality. He came into line with the Government, subscribed to the party platform, submitted to the necessary discipline, and that secured his nomination. Mr Wilson, well known as a journalist, but quite new to the political platform, obtained the other nomination, by a speech fluent, clear, earnest and fervent, with a fine manly ring in it, and of the fullest party character, lie showed, familiarity with all .the questions of the day, much commou sense and some thought, and he was frequently applauded throughout for his sentiments and his way of putting them. Mr LeGrove, who came next in the voting, distinguished himself by a most fervent ajipeai for State Socialism, the principles of which he regarded, and rightly so, as the basis of the Liberal platform. Very thoughtful he was. evidently well posted in all things pertaining to his platform, but those present thought him rather advanced, preferring more practical views. But the personality of George Fisher probably had as much to do with Mr LeGrove’s third place as any other consideration. Mi- Williams, who spoke fairly well, was rather too general for the meeting, and rather discounted his chances by beginning his speech with a defence against imputations as to a certain nomineeship. It is weak to appear as a defendant, and the weakness was fatal to a very worthy candidate. Mr McLean was the last speaker, and the last on the poll. It was a foregone conclusion, we must assume, as the city had experience of Mr McLean, who made that rather sensational win against Mr Bell in 1891. But in justice to his friends who had nominated him, Mr McLean was bound to go to the preliminary poll. We wish him better luck another time. What the party has to do is plain. It has now a ticket clear of all disturbing elements. It has to stand by its ticket and vote straight. At the last election it dissipated its strength among many candidates, and it lost its opportunity, and became a byword for looseness of organisation and backsliding invertebracy. Once more the opportunity has come. The opportunity is here, and the figures of the polling of 1893 are before them, an awful object lesson against the dissipation of overwhelming power. Let them take that lesson to heart and embrace the opportunity. Standing shoulder to shoulder, they will be true to their cause aud true to themselves. Their cause is just; their strength must he concentrated. ELEGANT CRITICISM. “ A political spieler ” is the new epithet coined in the Conservative mint for the benefit of the Premier. The mint is keeping up its reputation as a prolific producer of abusive epithets. It is its consistent way of making good the Conservative claim to the monopoly of good manners, light and leading of all kinds. The Premier made a speech at Hastings full ol telling facts and powerful arguments, the strength of which was well known to the least observant of his hearers. In reply, we have a mass of carping criticism, for the most part meaningless, and the impertinent hint that the Premier is a “ political spieler.” He is a “political spicier” because he denied certain charges, and because he spoke for three hours, and because lie asserted that the other side had combined against him. It comes to this, then, that every man who refuses to accept adverse judgment is a “political spieler” : that every man who talks exhaustively is dishonest; that every man who truthfully declares that the enemy is heterogeneous in everything but hostility to his party is untruthful. Yet these critics condescend at times to praise Mr Seddon for his grit, his fighting capacity and his power of work. How they can pretend to believe that Captain Russell, Sir Robert Stout and Mr G. Hutchison are not mailing common cause at the prescut moment, they do not even protend to show. Self-contradiction, hollow pretence and novel forms of abuse are not likely to prove effectual substitutes for the utter want of political ideas which, distinguish the Opposition. Neither will they reconcile the constituences to the dishonest Opposition policy of taking up the Government measures and writing the Government down.

AN UNANSWERABLE ARGUMENT. One of the best arguments wo have heard employed in favour of the Government is the reply of the Opposition writers to one of the poinls made by Mr Seddon at Hastings tho other night. That reply

makes light of his statement of the Government case for its Labour policy. Relief works at half-a-crown a day, and helpless watching of the exodus of men who could get no opportunity, was the policy of all their predecessors. The present Government devised the Labour Bureau, which organised the opportunities for labour, established the co-operative system which gave a living wage to every capacity, substantially helped the people to get to the land, and arranged for the regular dissemination _of knowledge useful to the agriculturist, besides establishing a regular system of inspection and control in the case of some of the leading products. It is absurd to make light of this contrast. Nothing is more true than what Mr Seddon said on this subject at Hastings, and nothing greater or more earnestly, thoughtfully practical has ever been done in any country for the well-being of the masses. FALSE ANALOGIES. The case of tbe National Bank of Queensland has been before the publie here for a day or two, and the enemies of the Government of New Zealand have utilised that brief period for converting the Queensland fiasco into a weapon of offence against the Government here. We can not compliment the Post on the honesty of its performance. It has made a close parallel between tbe National Bank of Queensland and the Bank of New Zealand. Of this parallel some of the points are in accordance with fact. But others, and those the most crucial points, are not only completely at variance with the truth, but absolutely unjustifiable upon any hypothesis whatever. The fact that the histories of the two institutions show some points of similarity is used by the Post to insinuate that other and very discreditable points on which there is no similarity are exactly alike. It is as bad a case of the vicious practice of suggestio falsi as any philosopher could wish to see.

Both institutions lost a great deal of money by bad banking ; both acquired properties which weighed them down with exaggerated valuations ; both were assisted by the State, and the methods of assistance applied in Queensland are getting every day more like those applied in New Zealand. That is, in brief, the whole extent of the parallel. On the Queensland side there are certain allegations of fact. The Post says that for a quarter of a century the Queensland institution was “dominated by the leading politicians of the colony, men of the ultra-squatting class ” ; that advances on a large scale were made to men of the “ right colour ” ; that when action was taken against the directors by the peoplo who thought themselves swindled by the issue of the debentures of an institution corresponding to our Assets Company, much Ministerial influence was brought to bear, and the Chief Justice was forced to resign for daring - to decide against the directors, one of whom was the Premier of the colony and others held distinguished public positions. Now, none of these things have had any parallel whatever in the Bank of Now Zealand. So far from being dominated by the leading politicians the bank dominated them; and they wore not men of the “ ultra-squatting class,” but of various professions, and some were adventurers. Moreover, no attempt ever was made to interfere with the Supreme Court. But all these things are brought forward as parallels, with an apparent suggestion that they are all to be seen in full blast in the present system of management of the Bank of New Zealand, which, as we have just said, never knew them.

To prevent any mistake on the subject, the history of the National Bank of Queensland is used by the Post to prove that Ministers of the Crown should not be identified with the welfare of any bank ; that no private institution should have the use of the money of the country; and that there should be a rigorous system of tho Government audit of accounts of every public company. Of these three conclusions the two first are absolutely meaningless, impotent and pointless. Nothing has anywhere yet proved that a Minister or the Crown may not be a trader with a bank account, nor has any one ever dreamed of suspecting the impropriety of the universal practice of passing public moneys through banking institutions. But tho meaning plainly intended to be conveyed by this solemnly meaningless farrago of rubbish is that the Government bank policy of New Zealand has been as dishonest as the Government banking policy of Queensland; that the bank here is in fact confining advances to people <>f the *' right colour”; that Ministers are acting like 1 heir brethren of Queensland, against, the 1) nif, i he hupreme. Court, and every other interest and guarantee for public order and security. The real facts are, of course, that tho Parliament of New Zealand prevented a great disaster by assisting the Bank of New Zealand on terms which will procure safety of the State guarantee, and cost the State not one shilling in interest; that there is no dejiendence of any Minister upon the bank ; that there is no recognition of political colour; that there is no danger to public funds. Former Governments tried to help the bank, were forced by pressure from the bank to help it, and did help it. The present Government helped the bank far more effectually and without any of tho pressure exorcised of jold, as typified in the famous story of the Auckland members being counted by a great power behind the throne as they v/ent to an important division. In Queensland the Government which has done all the mischief is trying to repair its error and save itself. In New' Zealand one set of politicians were made tools, and the present Government, which was opposed to those tools, is repairing their errors without any disturbing influence of self-in-terest. The two cases are as dissimilar, as far apart, in fact, as they can be. To make 1 a parallol; between them can only be

fanciful and foolish, if it is not a great deal worse. THE POLITICAL ISSUE. What divides the electors one from another ? It is a question to which various candidates give various answers. The Liberal Party which accepts the Government as its leader, the depository of its power, and the executive of its behests, relies on the work it has done under its leaders. It points to six years of achieve- { ment, to a body of measures just to all interests, to the amelioration achieved in the condition of the workers, to a vigorous policy of settlement, to the systematic encouragement of agriculture, to the prevention of a commercial disaster, to the enfranchisement of women, to the successful resumption of esiates without injury to any interest, to the cheapening of money, to a careful and prosperous finance, and to many other things too numerous to mention. On many of these lines the Liberal leaders made their promises six years ago. Their measure of performance gave them a renewal of power for three years more, with doable their former strength behind them. They are before the electors with a further large measure of performance, and with further promises still on the same lines. The claim of this party, and of its leaders, is a perfectly intelligible claim, thoroughly supported in every possible way. The Party of Opposition lives on nothing of its own. It seeks to live on the alleged demerits of the other side. To prove that the other side is unfit to be trusted, it asserts that all its measures and ail its policy are good enough to be carried on without change. In a word it asks the country to believe that the party in power is unfit to be trusted because it has done remarkably well. Is it any wonder that the numbers of this party are, like its arguments, poor ? Is it any wonder that their platforms echo nothing but cries of distress, that the atmosphere in which they live is heavy, that the signs of their distress are everywhere ? These things are the country’s response to the frequent claim of the Opposition Leader that the votes cast at the last election bulked in reality in his favour. In his own district Captain Russell Avas, according to this style of computation, in a minority. For the general part of his remarks, the signs to which we have alluded are a sufliciently complete answer. A party without merit of its own, with a bad past of its own, with admitted hopelessness of the future, cannot expect to make people believe that the party which has done well ought to be condeumed. “How humiliating,” said Mr Carroll the other day at Gisborne, “it must be to serve a side that had no policy than to kick out a Government that had one.” To put it plainly, the constituencies will not be humiliated.

The Independent Liberals resemble the Opposition in all these points. The only difference is that they call themselves Liberals, and the Opposition proper do not. But that is an unimportant detail, because both are united against the Liberal Government. It is just as wrong to ask the cottntry to give its confidence as it is to ask confidence for the other. No man or set of men can claim confidence for other men’s work.

Prohibition furnishes a contingent different in character entirely, because that contingent subordinates everything to the tyranny of an interference with individual liberty, which, besides being harsh and unworkable, is unnecessary and uncalled for, in a matter which the good sense of the population is improving rapidly for itself.

It comes to this, then, that in the confusion of conflicting political opinions there is bu t one clear issue. It is, shall the men who have done well for every interest be ostracised in favour of the three parties who fight against the irrefutable logic of facts oo the public detriment ? The electors can everywhere see this issue for themselves. It has been, in fact, plainly put before them by the various candidates and tho many newspapers, the greater part of which are not, a=, we have previously explained, in sympathy with the masses. They ought to have the practical good sense to act accordingly. Wellington, in particular, lias a magnificent opportunity to stand by the only party which has a valid, clearly reasoned, logically considered policy founded on fact, and supported by magnificent service. The party ha* given the city a“ ticket.” The Liberals should vote on the ticket, anil be thereby true to Liberalism, accepting the principles and the men who have made the Liberal pro-

gress of six years, in a degree which i

arrested the astonished. atton uei: • ■ i Liberals in every part of the world. 11 they fail to do justice to this grand opportunity, the Liberals of Wellington will deserve to be disfranchised in the future as they have been disfranchised in the past. THE LIBERAL TICKET. Thebe are, it is said, signs that the party is wavering on the ticket, that, in other words, it is ceasing to bo a party, and beginning to go olf into a dispersion of heterogeneous atoms. We refuse to believe anything* so absurd. The Liberals of Wellington arc party men for the simple reason that they have learnt from the history of the last six years that the party system has justified itself to the Colony by results. They are party men because they have seen that in Wellington their force lias been dispersed at every election. They are party men because they have suffered deeply the peculiar chagrin which visits the members of strong parties which have been defeated by their own act in permitting their strength to be frittered away. One we remember who was once prominent amongst them came to the front at a by-election six years ago, and strenuously maintained the doctrine of party concentration, He had effaced

himself, like a loyal man who gave up his own interest to the good of his party, which he clearly recognised. Very unselfishly he urged the party to stand together, concentrating their strength against those whose policy it was to rule by dividing. In the course of his speech he even went so far as to make a remark that was freely interpreted at the time to mean that if the safety of the party ever required that its solidarity should be used to elect a broomstick or a Chinaman, the party should not hesitate about electing the broomstick or the Chinaman, as the case might be. The three candidates selected for the Liberal ticket, by an arrangement by which all had agreed beforehand to abide, are not broomsticks ; neither are they Chinamen. Capable men they are who will give a good account of themselves. Oue of them has been erratic, it is true. But it must be remembered that he had received very galling provocation to lose his temper and his head. He has, moreover, announced that he has seen the error of his ways, and he has promised amendment on party lines. Is there to be forgiveness in the political world ? Are we to ostracise every capable man because he takes a wrong turn ? Are we to drive every man who goes wrong under provocation, in spite of all promises of amendment, into the ranks of the enemy ! J Perish the idea, which would make the working of party machinery impossible by requiring from it a perfection not merely rare, but impossible in all human institutions. We repeat, the three candidates of the Liberal ticket are solid, capable men, well fitted to do the party good service, and to represent the city in justice and truth and progress. We will not do Mr Fraser the injustice of supposing that his own candidature represents his preference for his own broomstick theory. We will only point out to him that there is no necessity for disturbing a choice which has avoided the extreme resort to which he once said the party ought to submit in case of need. There is no need to vote for broomsticks and Chinamen; therefore there is no need to supplement the Liberal ticket by fresh nominations. Supplementing is division, and division is disaster, and disaster is disfranchisement. There is no need for tiie Liberals to disperse their strength ; there is every necessity for them to hold together in loyalty and honour. As every one may be trusted to understand this thoroughly, we decline to believe that any one contemplates anything but “ the ticket, the whole ticket, and nothing but the ticket.”

On Saturday the Women’s Political League was, we hear, won over to the cause of the “ ticket.” We prefer, however, not to believe the news in that form. We do so because we have never swerved in our respect for the firm belief of this organisation in the Liberal Party, its programme, and its tried machinery. They cannot, we therefore think, have been won over to the “ ticket ” which has been adopted by the party organisation. No doubt the choice took many of the members by surprise, and the disturbing effect of that feeling was not lessened by the many stories which always fly about on such occasions. These are the dangerous times in politics, as in other matters, in which people have to act together. They require a little tact and common sense to prevent people from losing sight of great principles and the main chance for their security. A moment’s reflection is enough to save nearly every situation, and every situation that has ever been lost has been lost for want of that thoughtful moment. Fortunately for the cause the necessary moment was obtained by the woman’s organisation, and all realised that the selection had been made deliberately, that it is a good selection, and that there is no honour in looking back, and no time for hesitation. The women have, with the intuitive sense which distinguishes them, come to the conclusion that the time for action has arrived, and the timer for deliberation has gone. Loyalty and action being bound together, wo must move on upon the straight, bright line. That is the conclusion the women have arrived at. We have no doubt that our hope that the whole party will be found with the “ ticket ” at the polls will be verified by the other sections as well as it has been by the women. All must be aware that tiie two main things required for victory at the polls are unity of purpose and concentration of force. One is useless without the other. It is useless to lie determined Liberals if we are determined each to let a different man carry our Liberalism to the national assembly of represemadves. The result would be j >Sv that each of these different Liberals wuci i lull to get there, and the party would be three years out in the cold. To be successfully Liberal, we must concentrate our forces upon the “ ticket.” COLONIAL-IMPERIAL TRADE. The Commercial Federation of the Empire which Mr Lowles undertook his journey to exploit—if we may use the term—continues to increase in interest with the public of Great Britain. The files of the newspapers as they arrive show the signs, and the cables send them to us every day. It will not be surprising if what many people call the Jubilee year of the Queen’s reign brings this subject into a definitely improved position. If Mr Chamberlain takes so many opportunities of making speeches about the mutual relations between the Mother Country and the colonies, Lord Salisbury can hardly fail to note the great importance of the subject, and to draw his conclusions as to the need for doing- something. What he is generally expected to do is to call together a colonial conference next year, and get the matter not only thrashed out, but put upon such a footing as may bo agreeable for all parties to make a start upon without further delay. The impediments in the way are four

they are the Germaii and commercial treaties; the rivalry of Germany; the feared rivalry of Japan; and the great Freetrade tradition which dominates the finance of politics in the Mother Country. Of these, the first was taken up in Mr Lowles’ report, and the request has been formally made to the Prime Minister to get the obnoxious treaties out of the way, and there the matter seems to rest. The second impediment, the rivalry of Germany, the Colonial Secretary has made the text of his last speech. Speaking of the answers received from the colonies to his circular about their foreign trade, he said that the first halt of the last decade showed a greater increase of the German trade than the second: in other words, he said that the rate at which German manufacturers are cutting into the colonial trade is less than it used to be. “Made in Germany” is, the statistics show, a less favourite brand than it used to be. As it appears still to be a brand that takes, it will be necessary for the British manufacturer to open his eyes to tho requirements of his custornei’s, to discard lofty considerations of dignity, and get back as fast as possible to the old methods which of old helped to give him his great pre-eminence. This is what Mr Chamberlain inculcated in his last speech. It is a curious coincidence that Mr Seddon said the very same thing to the Manchester delegates at the banquet in Bellamy’s, in that remarkably frank and able speech he contributed to those proceedings. The delegates were pleased that his frankness to their people was equal to that which he displayed to his own, and were impressed with the reasoning. Indeed, the two shrewd old men who had passed their lives in worshipping exclusively at the shrine of British manufacture had already been horrified during their Australasian trip to find that the British manufacture was actually not an object of religious regard to the outsiders of the Empire, who were independent enough to demand, not only the good value which John Bull always prides himself on giving, but the special character for special uses which he often will not condescend to consider. They listened to the Premier with almost mournful appreciation, and they may be regarded as sure to make their voices heard with some effect in the great temple of the self-worshippers, after they get back. That will be in time to make their voice an echo of Mr Chamberlain’s.

Of the Japanese rivalry, which is so much talked of, it has not yet seriously begun. The popular idea is that under the shadow of the last Anglo-Japanese treaty the manufactures of Great Britain will be more completely defeated by the Japanese workers than were the Chinese soldiers and sailors by the armies and fleets of Japan. The question is whether this is not a groundless superstition. It is true that articles of Japanese make are marvels of cheapness. But, if a recent publication speaks truth, the appearance of cheapness is greater than the reality. For instance felt hats and woven stuffs are produced at ridiculous figures, and locally made bicycles are sold in Japan for dollars, when the imported articles cost pounds. Japanese merchants, however, who have been flooded with enquiries on the subject, have reported that the goods are not suited to the European or American market ; the hats would be unsaleable in any European village, the cheap woven stuffs would never wear, and the bicycles would excite the contempt of every self-respecting cyclist from John o’ Groats to Florida, and from Archangel to San Francisco. It is added that, though Japan has taken to importing machinery and has become independent of “ yarns,” she is not capable of making her own machinery, nut being rich in iron. This, coupled with the fact that her coal measures are, in comparison with those of Great Britain, limited, makes it doubtful if Japan can ever compete, as a manufacturing people, with the West for the trade of the world. The question must be decided by time. But every part of the British Empire would regard the settlement with more equanimity if the Imperial trade were placed under the protection of a bond of reciprocity and mutual advantage. The strongest of the impediments in the way of that is the great Freetrade tradition, as we have said. Mr Chamberlain indicated that in the beginning of this agitation, but now he seems, from his warnings against the foreigner, to think a little less of the tradition, and many Freetraders have been lately heard to declare on public platforms that the Freetrade settlement was only a means to an end, and not as a permanent thing to block all other possible beneficial endst The chances for commercial Federation are beginning to appear very much better. MINISTERIAL TRAVELLING EXPENSES. We read in the Post that Ministers travel with “ large retinues, liveried equipages, and the rest.” “ The rest ” is good. It fills up the corners and waste places in a singularly empty indictment. It covers up with an appearance of general decency the “ large retinues ” and «liveried equipages ” which have been evolved from a return in which they don’t exist, and have never been seen by any human being. It gives tone and body to the impalpable. Above all things, it shows exactly the spirit in which tho return of travelling expenses has been criticised. The critic was not in search of truth; he was in search of “ large retinues, liveried equipages, and the rest.” Not findino- them, he evolved them, and did not forget to complain that the return gives no ammunition to the Opposition. This is the sort of thing to which the enemy is reduced. Far better would it be for the Opposition Party if its friends earned their own taunt of “ in a general way not alluding to anything in particular. These returns of Ministerial travellipg expenses have always stood the test of

examination after exactly similar criticism, and the fact has long been patent that the more Ministers travel about the country tho better it is for the country. THE WAIRARAPA SEAT. The Liberals of this constituency having chosen a candidate to run in the Liberal interest, it only remains for us to wish him and them well. The candidate, Mr Hornsby, will give a good account of himself. Those who know him have no doubt on the subject; and those who do not w'ill see from the short sketch of his career which we publish this morning in another column that he is a man of much experience, originality and force of character. A man w r ho had the courage to attack the notorious Worthington, and the perseverance to keep up his attack in the face of great difficulties, and the grit to sacrifice everything to principle, and be content with a success which left him penniless, is a man to be trusted by the Liberals who have brought him forward to champion the Liberal cause. Mr Hornsby is well furnished politically at every point, he is a first-rate platform speaker, he has large promises of strong support. He will, as we have said, give a good account of himself. We wish him every success. MR HALL-JONES AT TIMARTT. One of the most capable speeches made during the pr esent recess was made by Mr Hall-Jones at Timaru on Wednesday evening. Is shows that the Minister of Public Works has certainly made good use of his time since he has been in office. His selection soon after the beginning of the year was received rather badly, we remember, principally owing to the large number of prominent men whom that selection had disappointed. It shows us how truly there is nothing new under the sun. Nearly 3000 years ago certain Greek captains, having to choose an admiral, voted each for himself, and were all unanimous that the next best man v r as Themistocles. The world has gone far since then, but not far enough to get away from men like those captains, or to forget their notorious and characteristic episode. The ashes of those long dead, selfish Greeks have floated in the atmosphere ever since. These form an impalpable powder of virulent power, operating by contact. A light sprinkling is enough to inflame the brain, turn the complexion green, and distort the vision in a terrible manner. It has, moreover, a very peculiar and ghastly effect on politico! colour, which it makes quite unrecognisable. Some of the more promising junior members of the Liberal Party got a sprinkling of the fatal dust as soon as the selection of Mr Hall-Jones to the coveted position was made known. It is notorious that they showed all the very distressing symptoms of their attack; from the swelling of the head to the ghastly sea green complexion which was discovered by the sarcastic Chelsea Sage to be the special mark of incorruptibility. As for their political colour, we have only to say that they became Independent Liberals to make it perfectly clear that they were no longer recognisable. The modern victims of this ancient and dreadful form of la grippe have in one respect varied the rule of conduct. Of old some sense of chivalry was left. After sacrificing on the altar of selfishness, each one of those captains in the old story paid honour to him whom they chose to consider the next best man, and they gave him the opportunity of proving himself actually the best man, and, what is more, they helped him right loyally in the proof. The modern victims of this painful fever have cut off all remnants of chivalry, and discarded it with other superstitions once powerful in the world. Their practice is to tear and rend the next best man,and, sc far from helping him to show the good stuff that is in him, they fight hard in season and out of season for his death, Thus it came about that Mr Hall-Jones suffered much during the session from the victims of la grippe, otherwise green fever. But he fought his way through, like a giant beset by shrieking pigmies, marching with simple dignity, keeping his temper in rare order, and making effective calm reply to the envious enemy.

Gradually it dawned upon the House, as the air cleared after these attacks, that the new Minister was a hard worker, with a tenacious grip of facts, with a strong logical faculty, and a most convincing way of putting points. Unprejudiced men, on hearing him for the first time, declared him to be not by any means the least convincing speaker on the Government benches. That opinion has been expressed in several districts where the honourable gentleman has addressed meetings. Every Parliamentarian unaffected by green fever, moreover, who has worked with Mr Hall-Jones knows his power and liis worth, and has long since admitted that the selection of Mr Hall-Jones was one of the best that could have been made, and a real xddition of quiet strength, ability and industry to the Government. At Timaru on Wednesday evening Mr Hall-Jones justified this good opinion with as good a speech on the position and services of the Government as has yet been delivered, closely reasoned, up to date in every detail, comprehensive and convincing. It contained, moreover, one note of courage and common sense, the qualities which fib men for leadership. Speaking of the petty clamour in Canterbury against the loan distributions, he ridiculed it, asked his hearers, Canterbury hearers, to rise superior to such petty considerations as the distribution of dole, and, taking highest ground, boldly reminded them that the good of the Colony is the good of every part : that if, for sample, the mining industry in one distr. ut is encouraged, the effect is felt by the agriculture of another. To this clamour most of the Canterbury members bowed their heads in very submissive fashion last session. They ought to have told their

fretting constituents what Mr Hall-Jones told his the other night. That they had neither the sense to see the reply, nor the courage to resist mean unreason, is one of the best proofs of the wisdom of a selection which chose Mr Hall-Jones for a leading position and left them all out. SHOW DAY. We do not suppose that keeping open on show day will make much difference to the tradespeople of Wellington. Nobody supposes that the absence of these gentlemen and their employees would lessen the attendance materially, because everyone knows that the masses are the solid power which makes or mars these exhibitions. The shilling entrance is the great silver question—free silver pure and simple — upon which neither the retail traders nor any other class can claim to exert much influence. But there is a fear lest by keeping open their establishments on the show day they may supply temptation to the masses to stop in town. The idea that even the attractions of the Wellington shops can prove superior to the big show as a draw for one special day in the year is too preposterous. It is almost as preposterous to suppose that people reserve their shopping for show day. That is a holiday, and people never care to do business of any kind on holidays, even the pleasurable business, for it is distinctly pleasurable, of buying food and raiment and personal and household adornment. Very few people are for that reason likely to prefer the delights of shopping to the pleasure of seeing their friends, having “ a crack ” with old comrades, of getting out into the open to see the brave sights, and enjoy the weather and the motion, and the excitement and the change. “ The shops will be there to-morrow and the next day, but the show is of to-day only ” —that is the governing sentiment. It is of course

possible that a- small business may be done on the morning of show day by forgetful people, who will confine that business to the absolutely indispensable immediate necessary. In such a business no retailer will ever miss his share. But if all keep open half the day, they will keep open as long as the business, whatever it may be, will last. After noon they may justas well put up the shutters, for the crowd will be away. We make this appeal to the retailers, not in their own interest, because, as we have shown, their interest is not likely to benefit by the unswellable minimum business offering to be done in the first half of the day. We make the appeal on behalf of the large number of their employees, who will be far better, more usefully, because more pleasantly, employed in enjoying themselves at the show than in staring at one another all the afternoon across their deserted show-rooms.

THE ANTI-PROHIBITION MEETING. Mb Bagnall had not much difficulty in making out a case against the Prohibitionists. He covered a great deal of ground, and he proved his case up to the hilt. A fluent, sarcastic speaker, he made havoc with the various solidities of the other side. His strongest point was, like many strong points, financial. What are we to do for revenue when Prohibition is carried ? When the law is in force prohibiting importation and manufacture, and declaring that the small modicum allowed for medicinal purposes shall bo quite unpalatable, how are we to pay our way as a people determined not to repudiate our obligations ? The Prohibitionists make light of the half-million of which the success of their strategy will deprive the State. Their contention is that the sober blue ribbon will substitute a far greater basis of taxation than will be required to make up that half-million. But they do not reckon with the fact that Prohibition does not prohibit. Mr Bagnall proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that the success of Prohibition in Legislatures is followed by a mighty increase in the consumption of alcoholic liquor. The only difference then between Prohibition and the present system is that the State under Prohibition gets no tax from the drinking habits of the people. The liquor fund goes on just the same under Prohibition, and, therefore, there is nothing to fall back upon to fill the void in the revenue. The people under Prohibition will drink more and have less to pay their taxes with. The last state will consequently be very much Avorse than tho first. Mr Bagnall having proved that Prohibition does not prohibit, had no difficulty in proving that Prohibition must be disastrous to the revenue. Need we wonder that the meeting carried the resolution condemning Prohibition root and branch ? This fad of the fanatics is not only subversive of freedom, but it threatens the finances of the country with absolute disaster. We can only say to Prohibition, “ Prevent, resist, let it not be so.” Thus we must clear the air of the election of noxious clouds.

AN INDEPENDENT LIBERAL. Mb Scobie Mackenzie, were it not for liis past association with the party which Captain Russell will not lead in the thirteenth Parliament of this happy country, might very well pass for an Independent Liberal. His past makes him an Oppositionist, pure and simple and out and out. Still it is pleasant to watch the wriggling of him affing the independent line. To judge by his speech at Dunedin, he has bent just as much to the breath of the Liberal storm as it is possible for any man, who looks the opposite way, to bend. We see no reason, of course, why Mr Scobie Mackenzie should look the opposite way to Liberalism. As he pointed out, his speeches have had much in them of the stuff of which Liberalism is made, and its best tables furnished forth. He began life, political life, in the purest way. Full of reading he was —rather too full for comfort, for he had swallowed much and digested little—and animated by honourable ambition, he was the most promising of the young recruits who fell into line with the Stout-Vogel Party. His fault, his only fault, i« those days was that

lie was a little too dogmatic for any man to be, and far too dogmatic for a beginner. Ho nursed bis fault, he modelled himself on Sir Oracle, he ceased to be open to conviction, he gave way to the passion of domination, and lie indulged his fatal propensity for fine phrases. The result was that, to adopt the saying of his friend Mr Bruce, the tail wagged the dog. His phrases wagged Mr Scobie Mackenzie right out of the path of practical politics. At last he achieved the impossible. It was with a phrase. We must keep the Government in, and we must keep their measures out. That is what he said. The applause of the unthinking intoxicated him, the exuberance of his own verbosity prevented him from recovering that unknown quantity, his political sobriety : he degenerated into a mere verbal gladiator, and in due

course the Parliamentary precincts knew him no more. A desperate attempt to overthrow the burly Minister of Lands on his own ground revealed to him the hopelessness of his position, and he was no more seen, though, if report speaks truthfully, he has been heard from often since in printed column. Three years have passed, and we have Mr Scobie Mackenzie once more running an election. With characteristic courage, for he is brave, he is trying for the suffrages of the largest constituency within his reach. That constituency must take care. The Liberal Party, which is numerically in the ascendant, cannot fail to remember the hero of the bottomless axiom about keeping Governments in and their measures out. What he wants now is to keep the measures in and the men out. It is the same wriggle, with a slight difference. In ISSS lie wriggled to the right. In 189 Ghe has advanced so far in political science that he wriggles to the left. The final wriggle should be a wriggle out of the field more. The Liberals of Dunedin should see to it.