MR STOUT'S SPEECH.

Otago Witness, Issue 1240, 4 September 1875, Page 9

MR STOUT'S SPEECH.

Un oie fiouse resuming at 7.30 p.m., Air Stout took up the Abolition debate amidst applause. Considering he was a new member, and had not heard all of the debate, he would not have spoken, but that he considered the persistency with which the Government was forcing the question of this session had at the present time brought on a crisis in the history of the Colony. He did not think the House, with all deference to it, competent to decide upon a purely legal question, as this was. Moreover, the empowering Act of 18G8 was only a declaratory Act, and never was intended to apply to this Abolition Bill. There was not much doubt this Bill would pass its second reading, and probably pass altogether : but he held that it was that sort of a Bill which would be but the beginning of a series of constitutional struggles by the people of New Zealand, for they had asked for many reforms which had not yet been granted to them. The member for Clive twitted the minority that they were united in opposing this Bill, but scarcely so upon anything else. But was it necessary that a party should be agreed upon everything? Were Ministers agreed upon everything ? Were they not divided upon the Deceased Wife's Sister Bill ? He would ask, if each was put separately into a room, and requested to make a draft of the Abolition Bill, how many of their drafts would resemble each other ? The Opposition were asked for their policy, but it was not their place to prepare one. Their opposition to the Bill was a sufficient platform for them, and it was the duty of the Government to show that the present change was necessary. One great charge against Provincialism was that it managed badly and sold big blocks of land. Well, no Legislative body was a perfect model of management, aud he had yet to learn that it was wrong or illegal to buy or sell big blocks of land. There was not a single word in any Act of New Zea land against purchasing as much land as a person chose. A noticeable fact in connection with the sale of land was, that all the holders of big blocks of land in Ofcago were staunch Abolitionists, and the gentleman whom he had just defeated was one of them. If Otago had not done a3 well by its land as it might, it was solely the fault of that House, which had taken all control over the lands out of the hands of the people of Otago. Why did not that House pass a law that gave the pastoral tenants 2s 6d per acre to resign their pastoral leases ? That House also took goldfields lands out of the hands of the people. Of the pastoral tenants, only the other day one of these persons asked £1 per acre to give up his pastoral lease. It was in bad taste for the General Government to accuse Otago of mismanagement. Coming to the Bill, it professed to be a decentralising measure. It was not. It benefited the great centres of population, but not the out districts, Dunedin alone would get about £10,000, and where would that money come from but from the out-districts ?— (Ministers ; No, no)— if not, then it must come out of the Bank. It must be unused money lying there. If Provincial Governments mismanaged, did not that House mismanage also? But in any case, was abolition the proper way to make a bad Government good ? Apply the same rule to General Government : If the Imperial Government said you have mismanaged your affairs, therefore we will govern you from Downing street. How would that work then ? According to the Commissioner of Customs, the people were to get greater powers than now. It was, in fact this— because the people had mismanaged their affairs they were to nave greater powers given them than they had before. Another argument against Provincialism was that it was costly. He had yet to learn that it was to substitute Shire Councils : and would not that machinery necessitate a chairman (or speaker) and other expenses in the same way as Provincialism? But some person would have to do the work in connection with their work that must be done, and that must be paid for. Granted you get rid of Superintendents and Provincial Secretaries. Still, some one would have to;do their work, and instead of the clerical work being decreased, it would be increased, in consequence of being govern ;d from Wellington. Where, then, was tha saving to be? Another way of looking at the question was this : The Bill was not a purely Abolition BilL It did not not propose to abolish in the full sense of the word. It kept the Provincial districts, and asked the Government to appropriate from year to year the money necessary to carry out the work of government for these Provincial districts. Then, as to subsidies, what was the difference between subsidising Road Boards and subsidising Provinces? If the system of subsidising Provinces was vicious, and was the cause for making this change, as the Colonial Treasurer had said, why seek to perpetuate it ? Then they were told they did not want nine law-making machines ; but pass the Bill and they would have ninety and nine of these law-making machines. Take the present Bills before the House, and half of them could be better and more keenly dealt with in the Provincial Councils than by that House. Was this the way to make a great nation, and was their Imperial Parliament to waste its energy upon abating a nuisance at Napier, or whether a clock-tower shall be erected at Invercargill? How like a great Government to go and copy their Abolition JMI, or portions of it, and even its errors, from an Ordinance of a trumpery Provincial Council like Otago. That was done. Then what hberty or power did the Bill confer upon Otago that it did not possess already? If liberty meant doing what one liked with one's own, ,t, t £ e _ i . BIU c c « rtaiul y interfered with the liberties of Otago. The Colonial Treasurer bad spoken about the people of Auckland who could not educate their children, and said that the Colony should help them. Why this was political communism. Let them endeavour to apply that rule to private life, and make the rich man contribute towards the maintenance of his poorer neighbour. Amongst tiie supporters of the Bill and opponents of Provineiahsm, there was too much of "mv district" in their complaints. One member after another favoured the Bill, because "his district bad been neglected. Was this a national feeling • ? Let them be consistentr-let them wipe out these " Provincial districts" altogether. What were they going to do in cases where there were districts with no land fund, as in Westland, where there were no lands, aud where one member said the Treasurer would have to find £25,000 for i* wants/ Where could that come from but from the wealthy ? IBefore he touched upon the national views of the question he would say it was not the way to build up true of a minority. If Ireland had but equal justice done her, would she at this day be crvin" out (The hoa member °he?e quoted Godley to show that if he was there he would have been against the BilL) One neat evil which Godley pointed out was that a elk tant and Central Government only answered when a people had a wealthy and indecent class to represent them. This country had not a leisured and a wealthy class to attend a J£tant Government and go into noliti™ a = * hobby. The probable nJffi ££%££&

be the creation of a class, and a pernicious one, of professional politicians who would make their living by it. According to Godley, they would have drawn a strict line of demarcation, beyond which Provincial Governments should not go, and within which the General Government should not be allowed to have any power. The honourable member for Timaru dilated upon the necessity of cultivating a national feeling, but was it necessary that we should have a Central Government in order to have a national feeling when she was surrounded by other nations? But that was not the cas>e with New Zealand. That a strong national Government is the highest ideal of Government one of the highest authorities (Spencer) upon politics aud sociology said that the highest ideal of government was specialism of powers and functions. A theoretical form of government was only fit for a theoretical people. We were not that. What, after all, was this talk about a national feeling but the exalting of a fetish, and asking the people to fall down and worship ; telling them that efficiency and economy would come as well ? They had a central machinery, and machinery adapted to the different parts, and it appeared to him that it was national and useful enpugh ; aud as for the latter portion of their administration, he thought it would stand its test. A sneer had beeen thrown out at Provincial Government because some one said it would be a goodtrainingschoolforouryouth. Well, and that was a strong argument in its favour. If that deserved a sneer, why did they retain local government ? If there was but one Parliament, how many of their young men could leave their business to come to Wellington to manage the affairs of the Colony '{ He only spoke because he believed there was a majority for this Bill, and he desired to warn the House that the alteration of a people's constitution and the disruption of their institutions was claugerous in its consequence. It was at the root of the evils which befell France, and would befall any coiintry that allowed itself to be beguiled continually by these schemes, and the hope that if they passed this or that measure— only vote for this or that scheme — aud they would rid themselves of all their troubles, and be better off than ever they were before. No, it was all nonsense to suppose that you could get rid of their difficulties of government by some sort of hocus-pocus. This wa3 a certain way of degenerating the people. These leaps in the dark could not meet the exigencies of Government, for good government was a plant of slow growth. Let them remember the proletariat of ancient Rome, who in the end turned round like furies upon those who gave them largesse and pampered them. Although Government might pass this Bill if it went to the country, it would not be the real, honest, hard-working settler who would compose the majority, it would be those to whom bribes were offered, and the large landholders. Another source of support to the Government would be from the newspapers that were controlled by the capitalists and wealthy landholders. Mr Wales has risen to speak at 9.5. Mr Stout's speech occupied an hour and a half in delivery. It was exceedingly effective, and was frequently applauded during its delivery by the Opposition, and by the whole House on concluding.