The Oamaru Mail. THURSDAY, JUNE 4, 1914.

Oamaru Mail, Volume XXXIX, Issue 12255, 4 June 1914, Page 4

The Oamaru Mail. THURSDAY, JUNE 4, 1914.

At Napier Mr Massey boasted that lie had borrowed more The Prince of money than anyone "Seatter-Gash." else; but he justifies tins profligacy by alleging that too much cannot be borrowed, so Jong <as the nioney is wisely expended. This is" the view on which the Liberals operated, and their borrowing consisted largely of Joans to assist people to get land, and farmers atid local bodies to get cheap motley. These objects were not approved by Mr Massey at the time that Liberalism was bestowing its beneficence; but the principles which were disreputeble when they were administered by the Liberals who initiated them arc transformed into the highest virtues by flic tongue of Mr Massey. He bribes the people with the people's money, in view of the elections ; for' that is a virtue when performed by Mr Massey. There was a time when Mr Massey was shocked at the expenditure of loan money either before or after an ejection. ■ As elections come every three years,, it was ''somewhat' difficult to dodge them ,- but that did not matter to Mr Massey. In a Financial Statement debate, on July 26tli 1910. a "Massey Opposition speaker protested against "the increase in appropriations for 1908-9 r which were £635,000 as against £477,000 in 1909-10, and asked: "Why?. The answeriis obvious. The previous year was election year, and it was necessary to sweeten the constituencies. It was necessary to bribp tliem with their own money. But there was no such reason last year to express any interest for the welfare of the people of the different districts. I say it is. a shameful state of affairs, and one that is not creditable to the people of the country, or to tlie Government of the country, and it is certainly not -creditable to the Parliament tliat allows it to goon." Our readers will not find it difficult to trace.the writer. Mr Miassey's "terminology is distinctive; the indignation is massive; the morality is for others. If an increase of expenditure, by a Government before an election is, by itself, evidence of corruption, Mr Massey's scatter-eash promise would come within tlie scope of his own con-' demnation. But lie asks us not to apply to him bis own rules of morality, and we don't. All we ask is that lie shall not too long be tempted, as Prime Minister of this country, to be grossly inconsistent and splenetic.