A VIGOROUS SPEECH.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 11200, 24 August 1898, Page 4

A VIGOROUS SPEECH.

MR SCOBIE MACKENZIE ON LAND

SETTLEMENT,

The following is the first portion of the ; speech delivered by Mr Scobie Mackenzie ! in the financial debate:—. Mr M. J. S. Mackenzie (Dunedin City).— Sir, as the honourable member for Oamaru , his done me the honour to invite me to reply I may as well accede, and if I do not deal at any length with his. speech, it must not be taken as showing any want of respect to the honourable gentleman.or his arguments. He knows there is a time limit, and that that limit will not. admit of my following him closely. The honourable gentleman apologised for speaking to-night and stated repeatedly that he was not prepared, but I notice that he had before him a number of type written figures. Mr Duncan: I had no type written paper before me. Mr M. J:.S. Mackenzie: And it appeared to me that my honourable friend had not learned his lesson very well. The Premier handed him some papers only a few minutes : ago.^ The last part of.the honourable gentlemail's speechwas;'undoubtedly his own; and therefore, .it was . rather more interesting,' if not instructive, than the matter placed before • him by the Premier. Just a preliminary word or two as to what the honourable gentleman said with reference to the eternal Bank ■ of New Zealand.. I thought that his.remarks on that score were entirely unworthy of him, and wholly unworthy of any member,of the House; for every member knows that when he levels these charge's against members on this side he is speaking not to the House or to the intelligent in the country, but to the most ignorant, and most unthinking in it. Ho knows that there is not one solitary word of truth in it all. When, he looks across the floor of the House and says that: years ago members on this, side were so indebted to the Bank of New Zealand they were unable to discuss with perfect freedom any bill brought before them, he forgets such statements are lowering and degrading to human nature itself. In the first place, there is no possible application in so far as regards any member of the House at the present time on this side. It is an odious thing to even allude to private banking accounts, but, so far as I know, there is not a member or^ this side of the House who owes a penny to the', bank, unless it may be in the ordinary wayof business, be in the ordinary: - way Of business. An Hon. Member: JSor ever did. Mr M. ■J. S. Mackenzie: Possibly they never did, and if they did it should be'no discredit to them. I never,did myself. I have liabilities enough in all conscience, but I have never owed a penny to the Bank of New Zealand ; but I feel it is degrading that one should have to introduce such garbage in a public speech. The honourable gentleman might-just as well say—looking at the common sense of the thing-—that all .the married .men are on this side of the Ho;;_ .i^nd' all the bachelors on that, -as to say. that the bank deals exclusively:with persons on any side of politics: : The bank deals with' any person; who wants (■accommodation and can give security. The statement is intended .to .influence the minds: of the intellectually degraded in the country. ■It is not . parlia; mentary to tell, the1 honourable gentleman that lie ought to be ashamed of himself, arid therefore lam not going to do so; but I hope that neither he nor any other honourable gentleman on either side of the House will descend to such a level again. ■ That is enough o.i this subject. \..'.-; \ ' ' ( Mr Duncan: You do not like it. Mr M. J,. S. Mackenzie: I do not care a straw. It does not affect me or anyone associated with me. Now,' lie told my colleague the honourable member for Dunedin .Uity that if he (Mr. Sligo) knew anything about a certain .water race matter he should get xip and say wl:at he knew". _. j Mr Duncan: .Yes. ' .'.-'._;. ! Mr M: J. 8.. Mackenzie: Very well; let the honourable' gentleman himself do the same thing—mention the name of any mem-, ber of the .Opposition who cannot vote,on the bank question, and let tis "see what his courage is. ' ' ■ ,■ Mr Duncan: I will mention what I did say. ■ '' ■'.',.' Mr M. J. S. Mackenzie: By all means,'. let him explain it ;away; but let us have no more'of this-garbage. ■ ; . Mr Duncan: You are misrepresenting me . altogether. ■ • . . ' . ' . Mr M. J.,.8. Mackenzie: I am not going to waste any more- precious time over such a matter. ' I have already said it is .unworthy of the honourable member-. I am going to! plunge into' the heart1 of the. matter, of this debato at once,, and in, order to do so, .perhaps,. the best' 'way is to commence with a question—which question I propose to truly answer myself. Tlio. question I put before the House is this: With the: Financial Statement in my hand, I ask'is'jthere atiy neat comprehensive phrase that would with perfect truth describe ,the leading fea.ture. the dominant, characteristic of'the principal table of figures in, it. • . ■'..,..' ..... 'I ' An Hon. Member^Neatrand^natty?. ' ~ j ',:■ Mr M; J.'S.-' Mackenzie: I will give, you a ' better phrase' than' that; longer perhaps, '.bin at once truer-and more characteristic. ; It is remarkable above all other things in\the fact ■ that it contains.nothing more or,less\thim a most audacious, and vat' the same ,time aiojt . odious, falsification of the public accounts, s Hon. Members: Oh! ' Mr M. J.--S. Mackenzie: That is so. Further, it' is evidently , a deliberate falsificatioi of the public accounts. Take the table on page 2. .Other hon. gentlemen have dealt with it more or less in detail. I do not propose to do so, but at tha very outset the eye catches three.- particular, years there —1880, 1881, and ,1882—during which period, in the time of Sir Henry Atkinson, the figures, assert that there were immense deficits, ranging from a million and a 1 hajf upwards. Now I call this a falsification of the public accounts, because if any stranger to the colony were to look at this table, and then go back to the authorised accounts of the colony—the Financial Statement of the years in question, the accounts, that were signed by the Auditor and Controllir-general,.to.loak for the,verification . of tho Premier's figures, he would hot find it. : But there is another aspect in which to look at the table, and-it is 1 on account of that aspect that I use. the word '.'"odious", in connection with it. Tile figure's falsely, showing the immense deficits set against, the years 1880.-1-2, have no other, effect than to traduce " and vilify the political reputation of the late. Mr Ballance, the! political chief of the hpriourabl& gentleman 'who',now sits there' as Premier. The huge,deficit of. 1880-was not Sir Harry Atkinson's, but an unfortunate legacy he in herited from the late Mr Ballance. The right honourable gentleman has been in-the habit in this House and in thecountry—and I confessit has repelled: myself as .it lias thousands of other people—has been in'the habit of trading on the name of Mr Ball^nce;' of shedclinf; crocodile's tears' over him. years after his. deat'.i. But wheti it suits him, he-is ready enough to cast a elur upon him ( 'and his administration. In order to "make a point against the late Sir Harry Atkinson, ho produces a table like this,, turns the public accounts upside down, falsifies themr-in: fact,' sends- grossly misleading statements forth to "the country, producing false impressions . a upon , the minds of the people, knowing well, that- a little inquiry would shift the responsibility from.the name of the late Sir Harry 'Atkinson, and place it against that of the late Mr Ballance. For let honourable members look at the name.which a.ppears as Colonial' Treasurer immediately preceding1 the year of those big deficits —1880, £I,s22,ooo—whose'name is it? It is the name of Mr Ballance. ■ '$• '..'•••• ' ■ ) An Hon. Member: Thers is no name. Mr M.J. S. Mackenzie: Thero is,'arid it is the name of Mr Ballance. ; The Premier-, when ho sets down these deficits to Sir Harry Atkinson in order to. deceive some " innocent members of this; .House ..and uninstructed people in the colony, did not take the trouble to explain the facts of the case^—that for Itmonths before 1880. there was no Financiaj Statement at all. It was Sir George Grey's year—who had first previously turned Mr Ballance ■ out of his Government — and r 'he" laid " some bald financial papers on the table, but j,hef c waa no . Statement of the year's finance—nothing more than yearly returns out of the Gazette. The last Financial Statement before 188 C was that delivered by the late Mr Ballance, in which he stated that,,i;hereWas a surplus of £120,000. Fifteen months afterwards, when Sir Harry Atkinson came into office arid looked into the public accounts, just as sojne day some members on this side of the House will have the opportunity—no distant- day, I believe—of' scrutinising the'accounts of thehonourable gentleman. ...Sir Harry Atkinson discovered that instead of , a surplus of £120.000, there was in r.eality a deficit of £1,000,000, which'million is here-audaciously set down against Sir Harry Atkinson in 1880. What was Sir Harry Atkinson to do with that million? Did .the right'honourable gentleman expect him to work it off —to pay it off out of rovonue? What. could he doiat a time like that—at the end of the great boom, when the colony was in a state' of utter collapse—the finances in frightful disorder and the revenues sinking daily? Whit could he do with it, except fund it, and try and commence again? And it was impossible that oven to commence clear, because the Liberal Government that preceded him had arranged' expenditure on such a scale and were borrowing at such a rate that it was'not possible to at once control the finance, and matters went from bad to wor?e before he had well got the reins of office in his hands. ' Well' do I remember, though I was not in the House at the time, the toil, anxiety, and unpopularity he had to sustai.i to wipe off—for a large part hod to come, out of taxation—the enormous deficit bequeathed by the honourable gentlemen who then, as now, called themselves the Liberal party. Mr Fisher.: What did you say about Sir Harry Atkinson ? You said he ought to be wiped off too; Mr M. J. S. Mackenzie: Did I say that? Then, depend upon it, it was true in some sense. Mr Fisher: Yes, in your Auckland speech. Csfo be continued. J