Untitled

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIV, Issue 5556, 18 January 1879, Page 2

When it was announced that Mr. Stout was about to address his constituents in Dunedin, there was a very general expectation throughout the country that at last the position of the Ministry, and indeed the whole political situation, would be placed before the public in a fair, comprehensive, and lucid manner. Mr. Stout is in one respect a bad speaker, whether in the House or before a public meeting. He has not art of leading an audience without proclaiming himself a very much better m'an from every point of view than those who are listening to him. We do not mean that he states his superiority in so many words, but that his manner, his tone, and the general air with which he surrounds himself, never fail to create the impression that he Is, in his own eyes, one of the best aud wisest of mankind, and as a politician rarely equalled, and still more rarely excelled. He did a good deal of damage to his party last session by this assumption of vast superiority; for men, though ready enough to admit and respect talent, have a very strong dislike to have that talent continually thrust into their faces, and to be shown how small in comparison are their own natural gifts. Mr. Stout always reminds us in the House of a schoolmaster addressing some of his largest sized pupils, but honorable members by no means resemble the pupils in their demeanor, for whilst willing to give the Attorney-Gene-ral credit for a fair amount of ability, they are neither prepared to look upon him as the condensation of the wisdom of the country, nor upon themselves as children or idiots. Notwithstanding this not inconsiderable drawback, Mr. Stout unquestionably commands a good deal of respect, and the position he occupied in the House last year seemed to warrant the expectation that when he addressed his constituents he would be really worth listening to. Wo are sorry to be com- ■ pelied to admit that a perusal of his speech has left behind a strong feeling of disappointment, and, to some extent, of contempt. Mr. Stout is far too clever a man, and far too well acquainted with all that has happened in the Cabinet since he accepted office, to believe that the account he gave the Dunedin people of the Tapanui Railway job was a fair and correct statement of the facts. He must have known well that he was deceiving them, or attempting to deceive them, and that his words would be repeated throughout the country, and be read and believed by hundreds not acquainted with the true history of the case. The real reason for the display of so much indignation with regard to the Tapanui Railway was that the Government entered into a contract for its construction without having obtained a shadow of authority from Parliament to do so. It is true that in a former session the Assembly' had, after very considerable skirmishing, orderediihe reservation of land near the projected line, the proceeds of which land might at some future time pay for the railway, whenever Parliament determined on its construction. But the making of the reserve was the only thing done, and members expressly guarded themselves against the supposition that they were authorising the construction of the railway. They did not consider that the time had come for undertaking the work, and they- said so in plain unmistakeable terms. Having then no authority to move further in the matter, and having the above recited expression of Parliamentary opinion before their eyes as an additional safeguard against going wrong, the Ministry during the recess called for tenders for the work,' and on the day after Parliament again met entered into a contract for the construction without in any way whatever consulting the House in the matter. Mr. Maoandrew was, of course, the chief sinner, and the whole affair was a political job of the grossest character. Mr. Stout well knew all these particulars, and yet when alluding to the Tapanui Railway professed ignorance of the cause of the indignation which had been so freely expressed. He led his audience to believe that the House had authorised the construction of the line, and that the Ministry had merely carried out their wishes. To show that our version of this story is correct we will quote from Mr, Richardson’s speech on the 24th of, September last on tho motion for going into Committee of Supply: — “ I understood the Minister of Public “ Works to say that the authority under ‘ ‘ which the Government let this contract “ was the resolution of tho House last “ year, and a Bill which it was proposed “to introduce this session. Further, the “ Minister for Public Works stated that “no present liability was incurred. I “ was very much surprised at both parts “of the answer. On reference to “ Han- “ sard” [1877] it will be seen that the re- “ solution passed last year was to this “ effect : That public lands of the value of £50,000 shall be set apart in suitable blocks for the construction of a railway from Tapanui to Waipahi, and that such land shall be contiguous to such railway, and shall not be sold or otherwise disposed of until such railway is completed. “There was considerable debate, and “ the hen. member for Totara said : He would rote for tho amendment on the distinct understanding that he was in no way pledging the country to spend a shilling on this railway, and on the understanding that he was only reserving land in the neighborhood of the railway until that railway was constructed. He had hoped that the railway would be constructed under the provisions of the District Railways Act. “ said he—■ Was quite satisfied with the resolution as it stood. . The County Councils would arrange to have the railway constructed, and after it was constructed the land might be sold.

It is quite clear that Mr. Stout’s explanation was a dishonest one, and that his appearance of ignorance and innocence was “put on.” For tendering such an explanation, and shamming such ignorance, ho merited and received the contempt of everyone who was acquainted with the facts. After such an opening it was not likely that the speech would prove very edifying. Mr. Stout endeavored to create an impression that last session was not a barren one. He was quite unable to see it, he said. The session had only been barren to the Opposition. Here

again Mr. Stout must have known and felt that he was saying “ the thing which is not.” Hehadbeenharassed, and worried, and derided in the House. He had seen the Government measures mutilated, thrown out, withdrawn. He had trembled for his tenure of office. And yet he could coolly tell the Dunedin people that the session had only been barren to the Opposition. Again we say that Mr. Stout, in making such an assertion, justly merited the contempt of all honest politicians. His allusion to a few Bills on social matters, which found favor with the House, only serves to make the case against him stronger. These Bills were comparatively of little importance, and to say that the session was not barren because th'ey were passed, is only one more instance of Mr. Stout’s political dishonesty. His account of the Electoral Bill is equally unsatisfactory, and the concluding paragraphs of his speech are stuffed with the crude imaginings of a restless, dissatisfied radical, whose political education, though doubtless very complete from liis own point of view, can scarcely be said to have had its commencement. The speech, as a whole, has thoroughly disappointed the country. If it is clever, it is clever as may be the speech of an Old Bailey lawyer defending some notorious criminal from the just punishment of his misdeeds; if it is honest, it is the honesty of the special pleader. It is not the speech of a clear-headed statesman. With our contempt pity must be mingled, for the task which Hr. Stout had to perform was one of no ordinary difficulty. He set himself to wash the Ethiopian white —to give the Ministry a clean bill of health—and the thing was not to be done.