BOUND THE CORNERS.

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVIII, Issue 8008, 12 February 1887, Page 4

BOUND THE CORNERS.

(From the New Zealand Matt, Feb. i.)

Some people are never aati-fled, and yet nothing fills them up, so gaseous are they; still there is always a vacancy, an insatiable void. Another delightful demonstration of this was given last week, when a certain writer in a certain evening paper, who was evidently well posted in the statute relating to nothing, waded in bald-headed in the cause of those much oppressed convicts, Penn and Caflrey. It was enough that some one, east, west, north or south, it matters not where, struck a note of maudlin sentimentality. It had a slightly popular ring about it, an oi polloi flavor, which was quite enough for. the writer in question in the way of a cue. And so the Ministry were favored with a homily, and the public with some charming inconsequential reading. TheMinistrywerebrought up all standing, at the point of the pen, were ordered to assemble immediately, if not sooner, and try poor Penn and Caffrey over again. It mattered not that the latter had already undergonetheptottess atthe hands of thelrpeers Jthat a judge Whose dictum has been, and still is, singularly free from challenge, was emphatic in his judgment against them; there are always sentiment mongers ready for any emergency, and hence the cackle for reprieve. But why the poor Ministry, Which is already dreadfully overworked, should be called upon toofhoiate as judge, jury, witnesses, and counsel on both sides, quite passes ordinary comprehension. The demand was just bunkum, and nothing else, a coney catching cry, and of a verity there are still a few coneys running about waiting to be snapped up by the skilful sportsman. Let the Judge and the Governor try Caffrey and Penn over again, and if they want a referee, I’m their Moses, Asmodeus was never called Upon In vain. Wonder if X shall get that J übileo whack or. the shoulder

I don't quite understand what is meant by “ unholy alliances,” in connection with politics. Regard modern politics from whatever point we may, and the detection of any thing holy about tham defies the keenest Visioned. All is subservient to some kind of self interest or another. Therefore, it not to be holy is the normal state of politics, a recognised condition, constitutional to politics, where the dickens does the unholiness —in its coloquial sense come in? Or why prate about unhniiness when the recognised governing principle of politics is expediency and office-conserving? Give a latter-day politician a portfolio, and there is scarcely anything ho will not dare to retain possession of it. All things to all men is nothing to his ailtics when his office is in danger. And as for alliances, righteous or unrighteous, what is it the man means ? There can’t be any alliance where there is only one side, and who will deny that is not the case these times; one side only, the side of the people, the side of the most votes, and of course the most votes lie with those who have the most to gain by a shuffle in politics. For ’tis only a shuffle after all, a political crisis mixes up the old hands, and they are just dealt out again, only a little differently. Sotermed Conservative Jack has not the slightest objection to sit on the same bench as so-termed Kadicalßill occupies, providing theoombination can be shown to be for the good of the one dominant side—the people—and when, I should like to know, can not political logic be chopped to that effect. Poor Mr Goschen’s combination with the Salisburyites in the Old Country, is termed unholy. Can't see it* a bit myself. Not half so unholy as the dreadful muddle made by the nnallied Gladstonites. I should like to know what could be more holy than an alliance between Gladstone and Salisbury. Let us suppose that, each having detected the errors of bis political ways, had fallen into the arms of a compromise; a middle course, the only one that really could, or can, serve the turn of the distracted Old Country. I say, let us imagine such an act of political magnanimity (an impossibility I suppose), and who would dare term it unholy ? On the contrary, it would be the very acme of righteousness, the abandonment of that detestable fetish worship that has found expression in party adulation. Party! a veritable juggernaut, crushing all that stands in its way. I say, Goschen my lad, go it. And Salisbury let E.1.P.; overboard with the nonsense. Do what is best for the civilised world, of which New Zealand represents such a very large and conspicuous section.

Are we civilised? You bet! Proofs? A bushel of ’em 1 Arn't we ready at any moment to condone any mortal iniquity when called upon? Is there any commercial crookedness that we arn't prepared to rule out straight, and rub off the corners, and make it look quite virtuous. Is there anything that wouldn’t be done to serve the individual turn, or the turn of select little coteries, who in their turn would be ready to pick out each other’s eyes, if an individual turn would be served thereby. Where is there to be found more artistically put up jobs than in this land of much latitude ? Aye, latitude in more senses than one. We must have what we want or “bust.” That’s how a noted Southerner euphoniously put it not so very long ago. Of course when we find we can’t get a certain thing we assume a virtue and discover we don’t want it, as is the case just now in the matter of further borrowing. Let us suppose that the dear, good, confiding Old Country people were ready “this instant' minute ” to lend us another five millions at .'M at par, that it was known the loan was a dead certainty, and that a plebiscitS wns taken to decide yea or nay. And the result? Who would not bet his bottom dollar that'the ayes would have it ? Of course we may, by the training we are now undergoing, be brought to a virtuous frame of mind. We now say “no ” because we know that to say the other thing would only fill our mouths with dust and ashes, and, hence, having learnt to say “no" once, we shall say it again under less pressure, and so develop, may be, that virtue so essential to national high standing.

When will the quarantine regulations be modified to meet the requirements of common sense ? Here we go again thrusting people into durance vile because two children had taken scarlatina, and one had died from acute bronchitis. Scarlatina! Bronchitis! Both endemic in the colonies, and their presence oc casions no particular concern. Why, then, should a lot of quarantine nonsense be evoked because they happen to show up upon board ship? Is it because it is expedient to do something occasionally to conserve the position of quarantine officers ? If a Governmental foot was only put down on such absurdities the people would receive a real good turn.

“ My Lord, Tom Noddy, got up one day, .And his Lordship called for bis cabriolet,”

And as advised by his Tiger Tim, went to see a-hanglng. So says an old quasi-oomic ditty, a satire on the —in those days—atrocious converting the execution of criminals to fete purposes. Andsooiety did rise superior to thatkindof thing under pressure, for the publicity of executions was suppressed. Now, however, it seems to be on the point of revivification. The strangula tion and neck-breaking of a batch of four at Sydney, appears to have been too much for the good folks: there to keep private, and so invitations were freely issued, and many a colonial Tom Noddy attended to “see the sight.” Faugh ! Disgusting! And such a bungle, too! The Bennie convicts were horribly treated in their last moments. How long, O Lord, how long is the ignorance, the prejudice of the past to hold sway? When, if capital punishment must be inflicted, will it be applied in accordance with the latest teachings of science, and be made as effective as painless ? With electricity to do the work, why use hemp ? ’ „

The Hon. Minister for Public Works spoke to some effect at that first sod-turning business at Grej mouth in connection with the Midland Railway. Right through his remarks was the burden of “Sir Julius and 1,” "Myself and Sir Julius,” “We had to bear the brunt of these attacks.” “Sir Julius’ marvellous exertions,” etc., etc., etc. In one place;the other .members of the Government are alluded to in a lumped-hp sort of a way, but “Sir Julius and I ” did the most. We were the boys, and no mistake. Two finer, fellows, my dear hearers, are not to be met with this side of the Equator. If the Hon. Minister did not use exactly these words there was exceeding strong implications of them all through the address. ‘Twas Sowery, too; the speaker fairly excelled himself. Didn’t think he had so much of that kind of stuff in him. Asmodeds.