Untitled

New Zealand Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 4237, 19 October 1874, Page 2

Wb have, by telegraph, what purports to be a summary of speeches delivered to the Franklin electors at Waiukn, ■ by Messrs. Buokland and May, members for the district. It is hardly possible to conceive that tills telegram fairly summarises the speeches of these gentlemen. Mr. May and Mr. Buokland went into different lobbies on tho only party divisions taken, during tho late session, tho former voting against the Abolition resolutions, and the latter for them. And yet, strange to say, Mr. Buokland makes no reference to that very important feature of the session, if we are to accept tho telegram as giving an accurate epitome of the points touched upon by him. Now, we happen to know that Mr. Buokland contemplated speaking out on that question when ho met his constituents, and we also know that in tho Waiuku settlers he had a sympathetic audience. He had only'to put the issue fairly before the meeting to have had his action in the Assembly fully endorsed. Mr. May, on the other hand, explained his vote on the

question of constitutional amendment. One can understand his reason, which is identical with that given by Mr. T. B. Gillies. “All or none,” is their argument. To be sure, it is neither logical nor intelligible, as applied to existing political institutions in New Zealand, but any excuse in such a strait is better than none at all. We fail to see any justification for Mr. May’s vote, however, on his own shelving. He said “he voted against “the abolition of the provinces because “ he considered it should also have been “ applied to the other provinces of the “ Middle Island.” Now, if Mr. May was prepared to abolish Provincial Government throughout the colony, and without an appeal to the people, on what principle can he justify his vote against the abolition of Provincial Government in the North Island, which for all purposes of local administration is as distinct from the Middle Island as Tasmania is from New Zealand ? If it is a wise policy to abolish Provincial Government as a whole, it cannot be an unwise or an undesirable thing to abolish it in part, more especially as the natural division of the colony enables it to be done, in either island, without creating the slightest derangement of the machinery of Government. Surely it cannot be held that it is essential to the working of the Provincial Government in Otago that the same system should be continued in Auckland. They do not participate in the same revenue, nor do they interfere in each other’s local affairs. Let the Otago Provincial Council and Executive manage the affairs of their own province as they please ; they will do it quite as well when the North Island provinces have been abolished as they do at present. And in like manner, so long as the North Island.is well and economically governed, it matters nothing to the people whether the Middle Island has a costly duplex system of Government or not. Mr. May, and those who think with him, know this quite as well as we do, -wherefore we are forced to regard his vote as having been given for party purposes. To that we have no objection; but we protest against such a flimsy and untenable justification as he has put forward. The meeting passed a vote of thanks to botli members. It could not record a vote of confidence in both, as they voted on opposite sides ; but being neighbors and old colonists, justly held in personal esteem, a vote of thanks was the only form a resolution could take without condemning one or other. And so the members for Franklin were thanked at Waiuku. Most likely, when they meet the Tamaki and Mangare settlers at Otahuhu, the record of their meeting will be of a livelier character. One word before we have done. The members for Franklin agree in their hostility to Mr. Vogel. This is by no means new or unexpected. They are so far consistent ; and Mr, Buckland has been heard, times out of number, prophesying the financial ruin of the Colony. The vision of a general crash, in which everything will be broken into very little bits, has been present to Mr. Buckland’s mind for many years past. It was there before the war, it was there during the war, and it is there still; yet Mr. Buckland has been a most successful colonist, adding acre to acre and field to field, and steadily increasing his risk in the general smash that he sees impending. This conduct appears to be quite inconsistent with belief in his own theory of approaching ruin ; but wo hardly think he is serious. " “Mr. Buckland said the “ Premier’s policy was bad, and would “ work miseries unparalleled in ihe history “of the colony.” This is the old tune set to new words. The Waiuku settlers kno w this well enough. They know that the Premier’s policy will treble the price of land in their own district, by bringing it within an. easy distance of the market and port of Auckland by rail, and they also know that few men in Auckland have gained indirectly to so great an extent as Mr. Buckland himself by the very policy which he denounces. It is a pity that a gentleman of Mr, Buokland’s experience and standing should adopt an exaggerated style to express very tame ideas. It does harm out of the colony, and within it also, for every one in Now Zealand who reads the telegram under review does not know Mr. Buckland’s idiosyncrasy.