The Oamaru Mail. TUESDAY, DECEMBER 26, 1911.

Oamaru Mail, Volume XXXIX, Issue 10958, 26 December 1911, Page 3

The Oamaru Mail. TUESDAY, DECEMBER 26, 1911.

The letter from Mr Richard Duncan which we publish A Belated Appeal, in another column should have been written to us prior to the election, if at all, when we invited all those who differed from our views to dispute them in our columns, and nobody thought fit to do it. There was then a conspiracy of silence, because those who were opposed to the Government knew that they were incapable of proving their accusations under the scrutiny of the public and in the fierce light of journalistic discussion. Mr Dunpan asks: Is it any use twanging the lyre to tho tune of Tory, Tory, and indulging in invective against Mr Massey and his party, vide tho heading of your editorial, in the present state of political feeling?" But wo are not going to allow the best friends of the country to be abused for no other reason than that they arc in the way of the resumption of a policy that was condemned 21 years ago by bitter experience and by an overwhelming vote of the people. Mr Duncan should address his kindly expostulations to the gentlemen to whom ho pins his political faith, not to us. When Messrs Massey and Herdman, to destroy our influence, alleged that the proprietor and editor of this journal was a slave to the Government for the sake of monetary advantage, that was, of course, not "invective." This is our first reference to the accusation, because the people of North Otago and South Canterbury know what our career has been —that for 35 we have advocated the principles we advocate to-day and sympathy with which would make any man or party acceptable to us, whilst antagonism to them would make any man or party unacceptable to us. "We have supported the Government because it has done what the people wanted; it lias not supported us because we have been obedient to its will. Will Mr Duncan, or any of his political friends, tell us and the public wherein we have ever committed an error in our political advocacy, or in our estimate of wiiat was required by the people? Then the public will know what value to place on his judgment. Were we wrong in securing the opening up of Waikakahi or of tho other estates in this part of the country that wo insisted should be transformed into homes for anxious land-seekers ? Was it a crime against the. people to secure the parcelmcnt of the pastoral runs in the Upper Waitaki district 30 years ago? And yet those with whom Mr Duncan seems to bo politically associated did their utmost for the maintenance of these huge properties intact. Those were the days when New Zealand needed tho vivifying influences of a rational and popular administration of its land and an equitable taxation system, for its young people were leaving its shores in droves. From the moment that a change of policy occurred the aspect was changed from gloom to brightness; Waimato and Timaru sprang into activity and Onmarn was ;saved from commercial prostration. Does anybody think that these achievements of the Liberal Party have earned- for it everlasting and utter condemnation, and that those who helped in the transmutation should be denied the reputation of decent citizenship? It may, to some seem to be folly to stress these things now ; but the time is never inopportune to tell the truth, and to recognise the people's friends and expose their enemies. It is because of tho "widespread journalistic knowledge and extended opportunities for accurate information" attributed to us by our correspondent that we recount facts and draw deductions which are, seemingly, obnoxious to those who do not possess such advantages and do not want them, because their .creed would wilt under the influence of political enlightenment. Again Mr Duncan misaddresses his expostulations when, he desires us to "bend to the wishes of the people, and, at least, allow the Reform Party a fair trial before further condemning -them." Though our correspondent may not be a safe authority as to what are the people's wishes, his inference that they should be consulted, coming from such a-source, is specially acceptable. Usually, the Tory prefers to bend the people to his will, and he is not over scrupulous how he does it. As for ourselves, we have no other alternative than to defer to the people, and if we. had we would not choose it. Though, being human, they may err sometimes, there are sections of them who err systematically. The greatest human wisdom is the consolidated wisdom of the people, and'the journalist knows best what it is. The will of the people which fascinates our correspondent just now is the will which has been ordained and manufactured for them, the media of its expression having been tampered with. So that when our correspondent asks us to allow the so-called Reform Party a fair trial, we answer that it is not 'our prerogative to decide its fate. However, what is "the people's will?" or who are "the people?" _ are points on which political schismatics convenient differ. Nor is "the people's will" easily demonstrable.- Our- correspondent deifies the people, for the moment at least, because he discerns in the recent electoral verdict a spontaneous acceptance of his special political Philistine —a 3-earning for an indescribable efflorcscenco into a new and better national life. But what he really sees is an abnormal situation. The people will yet express their' will after a true democratic fashion ; then the "opponents of Liberalism will receive just as much consideration as they can command. At present, no one. appears to knowhow much that is; and the injunction from the sovereign people, which our correspondent so much admires, lacking defmiteness, it is not unlikely that, if the Government is called upon to choose between the ambitions of a political element and the

good of New Zealand, New Zealand will bo given the first thought. We hear again about "the enormous debt," which, however, is made up of loans voted by Parliament largely at tho instigation of Mr Duncan's friends, who last session refused to reduce tho amount of borrowing for the year by £200,000 when they had an opportunity of doing so, and who aro sohungry for railways that' there is no satisfying them. And we are told that, "even supposing three-fourths of the loan is reproductive, if the income is spent as fast as acquired it leaves the debt practically at the original sum," etc. We dare- say it is useless to. tell Mr Duncan for the thousandth time that the receipts from a large'proportion of the debt pay the principal as well as interest, and that the xiebt has been partly contracted for remunerative public services as well as to lend to farmers, workers, and public bodies. On these points no enlightenment was sought in our columns during ..the election, when.the public mind was being influenced by fabulous •allegations. It now only remains for us to. notice this utterance: "It is;to be regretted that, in your article, you should have deemed it necessary to introduce the sectarian element," etc. This is reminiscent of the-election methods of Mr Duncan's friends. It was they who did what Mr Duncan condemns, and it is now sought to cover their offence by throwing the blame on one of tho sources of its exposure.