Political.

Otago Witness, Issue 1382, 25 May 1878, Page 7

Political.

MR DONALD EEID, M.H R., AT MOSGIEL.

Mr Donald Reid, M.H.E,. for tho Taier district, addressed a meeting of his cons fci tuents in the "Volunteer Drill-ohed, Mosgi el on the 17th. About 150 persons were pre sent, and. on the motion of Mr James Allan, Mr Turnbull, of Dunira, was voted to the chair. The Chairman opened the proceedings by remarking that they were assembled to hear the representative of the district, Mr Donald Reid, give an account of his stewardship. No doubt Mr Reid would have something interesting to tell them, and he should not take up their time further than to ask that they should give him a fair and impartial hearing. Mr Donald Reid said : Mr Chairman and Gentlemen — When I last had the honour of addressing you it was immediately after the close of a somewhat protraoted session of the General AB3embly — a session during whioh a greater amount of recrimiaatioDS and strong party feeling had been exhibited than I had seen in the Assembly on any previous occasion. It was also immediately after the passing of the Abolition Bill, at the time when men's minds were much excited as to the effect which that law would have on the affairs of this Province, when very strong feeling was exoited throughout the different sections of the community here in regard to that Bill having been passed, as against, I may say, the almost unanimous wish of the constituencies of this Province, and immediately after a convention had been held in Dunedin, at which some resolutions were passed, which I at least thought highly injudicious. Well, gentlemen, the speech I made to you on that occasion called forth some very severe remarks from a portion of the Press in this Province. I may instance especially that highly impartial and hightoned journal the Otago Guardian — that now lamented, or defunct, or abolished, or absorbed journal ; and also the Boanerges of the Opposition came forth, in the person of Mr "Robert Stout, to criticise the address I delivered to you on that occasion. Well, gentlemen, I answered the leaders in the Guardian so far as they deserved any answer, inasmuch as there was no argument whatsoever contained in them, inasmuch as they revelled iv that kind of abuse, which is well-known, 1 believe, in some parts of America. The best definition I could give of theso articles would be to say they were " slashy and spicey." But with regard to the letters from Mr Stout I answered some of them, and I wish to explain now why I ceased to repty to his letters. In the first place, gentlemen, I was placed at great disadvantage in answering his letters from Wellington, and it so happened, from the way in which the mails travel here, that tho vessel that brought the paper containing his letter was always crossed by another vessel going South ; and by a very strange coincidence of circumstances, 1 suppose I must call it, it happened in this wise also, that when my letter arrived here to be published, and in time to allow of Mr Stout's reply, before tho mail left again, this being the terminus of the line, there was an apology (on the last occasion) that they had received my letter but could not publish it before Monday or Tuesday* and of course the steamer left lefore the letter could be published. My letter was followed by Mr Stout's on the next day, so that my letters appeared Borne ten days after Mr Stout's, and Mr Stout's the day following my own. Another rea&on for my ceasing to answer tbe letters was that the tone of Mr Stout's last letter was such as to show he was not in a fit state of mind to argue the matter. It contained no argument, but a great deal of what I might call sophistry, and some strong expressions which were not in point of fact accurate. But. gentlemen, I have perused those letters since, and I think it right I should refer to one or two expressions in his last letter, as this i? probably the last occasion on which I shall ndcVr«S3 you as your representative. At the time, I must say I simply smiled at the letters, and said to myself, " Well, evidently the man is not in a fit frame of mind for me to continue the correspondence with him," and did not notice the strong assertions, or pay much attention to them, until I reperused the correspondence. Well, gentlemen, this is the letter that I refer to of Mr Stout's. Now, to show you that I have not been exapg-rating in saying that letter contained epithets that were not fit to be inserted in any letter where an argument was being conducted, I will quote from the letter. In one of his first statements here, he describes me as the " newest Minister," and the " latest Centralist pervert." A pervert is one that is going aside from the true, and it signifies corruption. There is no argument in such asßertions as these. Suppose now I were to say that Mr Stout is the newest Minister, and one of the most recent Centralist and Land Fund pervert, thab would bo no argument, but might be aa accurate ,a description aa that given by him of myself. Butj I do not like bringing myself

to the level he adopted when he wrote this letter. Then he enters in this letter into the question of the Canterbury run-i, and on that subject I intend to address you somewhat fully this evening. But he here insinuates that I am very care'ul to say what I did n the House iv regard to this, and what I proposad in the House, but, he adds," concerning his present views he conveniently drawe a veil over them." The fact was that my views had not altered, and auch an insinuation was exceedingly unfair. I think in adopting the course I did it was sufficient for me to explain what my views were when the matter was under disoussiou, for my views had not undergone any change, nor had I drawn any veil over them. Then he asserts in this letter that I remained as a member of the Opposition to all outward appearance till the Taieri meeting, and was chosen Chairman of a banquet given at the close of the session by tho Otago Opposition to the A uckland and Canterbury members, and as one of those who me f , him and talked to him daily, had not by a.iy hint shown that 1 wa« other than one of themselves. I wish to refer to this because ib vvaa brought up by the member for Oamaru. I made the explanation in the House us I explained to you here when I addressed you. I told you I had never attended any meetings of tho Opposition after tho day I told Sir George Grej I could not work with him any longer, except on the question of Abolition — that on that question I would bi with him, but that on any other question I must act for myself. Advantage was taken in the House to deny the statement I had made. Let me explain with regard to the banquet referred to by Mr Stout. Ido not think the banquet wa3 to the members of Auckland and Canterbury. I think it was to J'ir George Grey. At an early period in the session, so far as ray recollection serves me, Sir George Grey invited the members of hi 3 party to a diuner, and it was agreed among them that they should give a dinner ia return before the close of the session. Time wore on, and these differences had arisen. But however, it seemed those who had charge of these matters — I suppose the Opposition — had arranged for the dinner, and a t<oket was sent to me. I was acting as an independent member, and when I received the ticket I intended of course to pay for it, but had not made up my mind whether to attend the banquet or not. The day before tho dinner, or the day of the dinner, 1 was waited on to see if I would take the chair, and I said I could not. Mr Stout waited upon me, and I told him that the reason I could not take the chair was that the ohairman would have to propose tho health of Sir George Grey, and that I could not do that, beoauße I could not cay anthing in his favour. Mr Stout agreed to propose the toast from tho vice-chair, a mo it unusual proceeding, and I said, " Well, I have no objection, I will take tli3 chair on those terms." Now, gentlemen, ia that a matter of truth to be in a letter, to say that I had attended this banquet, aad that that was an indication I had never left the party ? Then again, gentlemen, if anj'thing were required to show that I had left the party. I will quote from the speech I made in the Housa about this time. Of course, party is, in fact, nothing to me, it ia principle I adhere to. I say party without principle is no where for me. I would not associate myself with a paity that had not some higher aims than some simple party objects, party obstruction, and party ambition and power. What I said in the House on one occasion when I was much annoyed with the party — I quote thia not because I think it of much importance, but because Mr Stout asserts here that no one can deny that to all outward appearances until tho meeting at the Taieri, I had not left the party — was: — "Durisg the present session his position had been a very unfortunate and painful one to him. His feelings on the most important question had been with a party with whom, owing to their extreme action on many occasions, he could not act ; but he endeavoured to act as loyally with them as he possibly could, because they supported generally views which he believed in. He had therefore on many occasions, when differing from that party, thought it right rather to walk out o? the House than vote against them. And this was the return which he got for subserving his own views on minor questions in order to support the party whose policy on one important point he believed in. The con duct of the leaders and of some of its members had been such a^ to make him feel disgraced that he had been compelled to work with them in order to carry out a policy which he believed iv. The House had been told that these honourable members came there that evening to promote public business ; but could any honourable member who saw the efforts they ms,de to get a count out when tha House met at half- past 7 o'clock, believe that such was the caae ? If; was an insult to honourable members.' common sense to say that their intention was to promote the conduct of public business. He telt convinced himself, from the action t.ikc-n, that the intention was to defeat the object; which members had in coming there that evening. Instead of being allowed to go on with the business, the time of the House was taken up not with fair discussion, not wiih promoting business, not in fulfilling the legitimate functions of an opposition, but in pandering to the gratification of the evil dispositions and feelings of some honourable members, whose solo object appeared to be to irritate and annoy the Government, and keep members up to all hours of tho night, to the neglect of the public business." Gentlemen, I ask was that plain enough speaking to members who claimed that I was one of their party, and this weeks—probably months — after the time I told them I would not attend more of their meetings, and would not be bound to vote with them on any question except Abolition ? I think, gentlemen, thia is a sufficient reply to that statement. There is another part of Mr Stout's letter, the concluding part, which is all I think necessary for me to refer to. It is, "I again assert " — Mr Stout is strong in his assertions, anyone who know*) him is quifce well awnro of that, and 1 think Mr Stout's wot st enemy will not f.ccuso him of execpsivo modesty, so that hio assertions sometimes do not go for a great deal — " that conduct such as his degrades politics. It tends to makspeo.*

pla believe that there is no guiding principle unless the struggle be for position or salaries, or both ; and when this comes to be acknowledged wo may s<y farewell to good government, and welcome corruption in all shapes and places." Now. gentlemen, I have br-en a considerable timo in politics-— a iruch longer time than JVlr Robert Stout, a 8 yet— and I say if it ia to be a question of position and salaries, well. I think for the time he haß been in politics ho will come out on the best side of tho ledger by far. I will siy this — that I w.io as long in politics as Mr Stout has been altogether, be/ore I was in power or place, not because I might not have been in power aucl place, but because I woald not accept power or place with those with whom I did not agree Now, before I conclude I will ahow you what it is that degrades politics I say this, in the face of the meeting, that I stand here having been for some fifteen years the representative of this district, as respectablw and as much respected a maa as the most popular member in the Minify or the Opposition. The belief is not abroa-1 that I sacrificed my principle for power or place, and I tbink it was most unwarranted and uncalled iut o» the part of Mr Stout to make that assertion, I may say that I hava spoken of Mr Sfcont; without prefixing tl^.e honourable, not front any disrespect, but simply because it has so come mesv convenient in addressing you. I think he was unwarranted in applying such terms to mo, or in attaching to my name the wo 'da " welcome corruption in all shapes and places."' Mr Stout, as you are aware, is a strong pnrf.y man, and I believe much of the obloquy 10 which I have beon subjected is du-T to the fact that I hav< not been what is considered a staunch enough party nwn, I have told yon that Ido not believe in party except as it has respact to principle. M r Stout says I should not forget that he followed me when in the cold shades of Opposi'i^n. Ido not forget thfcfc but would remind him there was a principle we were contending for. But then there was no principle that could be carried, and it? was clear thers must be a change of Government. Mr Stout ought to know that this is no new phase for me. At the time ho refera to (1873), when another Government wasin office, I gave great offence then because I would not take up a position of obstruction to the Government;; and that 10 such an extent was this feeling evinced that one gentlemen, who stood to be elected for.-tha purpose of supporting me, took umbrage aud was offended, and retired because I did not take up that position. I B%y party government must be the foundation of our Government under the genius of our Constitution. Bub I say also, if there is to > b<j patty government, the party muab havo principles* aad these principles they must adhere' to, and not reqiire membeis to fight simply for party without respect to principle and'wlthouD regard to tbe ohjec'a w^ioh they wish to achieve. Gentlemen, I would '1 Bay that the system of party • government, being initiated or introduced by Mr Stout and hh friends, is one which will have a most injurious effect on this country, and it is the one whii-h will degrade • politics. The system of party government thoy have established is that members for no principle of their own are to follow one or two great leaders, and to support them whatever they bring forward. I have here a short extract on the effects of party government, written by a master-hand \tho h.ia studied and seen the effects of this Isiml of government, and I think I may claim youi* indulgence while I read it: — "The patty man is a dangerous politician"— mark you, it is always to be the party man in tho sense 1 have described, a man who would saciitice everything and follow a leader--" ha h»3 associated bis ancbitiou, his interests, and his affections with a party. He pri'fms doubtless that his side should be victorious by the best means, and under the championship of good men, but rather than lose tbe victory he will consent to any meaus aad follow any man. Thus with a general desire fco be uprii^ht, the exigency of his party constantly pushsa him to dishonourable deed 3. He opposes fraud by craft, lie by lie, slander by counter as* persion. To be sure it i 9 wrong to misstate, to disturb, to suppress or colour facts ;, it is wrong to employ the evil pasuons ; to set clas3 against class — the poor agaiutt the rich, the country against the city, the farmer against the mechanic, cue section against another section. Bat his oppoiier^s do it, and if they will take advantage of men's corruption he must, or lose by his virtue. Ho gradually adopts two character*), a personal and a political character. All the requisitions of his conscience he obeys in his private character, all the requisitions of his party he obeys iv his political conduct. In one character he is a man of principle— ia the other a man of mere expedients. Ah a man he raeaua to be veracious, honest, moral ; as a politician hois deceitful, emming, unscrupulous — anything for party. As a man ho abhors tbe slimy demagogue— as a politician he employs him as a scavcuger. As a man he shrinks from the fheiliousnesi of slander, as a politician he permits it, smiles upon item otiiei'3, rejoices in the euoccss gained by it. As a man ho respects no ono who is rutten in heart; as a politician, no manthiough whom victory may be gained can bo too bail. As a citizen he is an apostle of temporanco ; ao a politician he puts hia shoulder under tho men who deluge t>ieir track with whisky, marching a crow of brawlmg patriots, pugnaciously drunk, to exercise the freemanjs noblest franchise to vote. As a cit'zsn be ia considerate of the young and counsels them wjthadmirablo wisdom ; then asapoliticianhe votoa for tools, supporting for the magistracy worshipful aspirants soiaped from the ditch, the grog shop, aud tho brothel ; thus paying by deeds, which the young aro quick to underst-iKI, 'I jested when I warned you of bad company tor you perceive none worse than those whom I ilcfoght to honour." ' Gentlemen, I would almost; imagiao that tho piiri.on who wrolo that had been taking notice of what li.ir been going on in Now Zf aland — (laughtti)— during tho last six or seven months. But, sir, there is another aspect of the party man, and it ia one I was amused at. The other day I noticed it referred to in a "local" in a piper. Thero was an aspirant for somo sppointment under tha Government interviewing a Minister, and the question turned on parties. " Do you know," said ho, of course ho was a politician wishing for au appointment for himself or a friend, "do yon know, when-

ever I find anyone coming over to us I always notice that there is something remarkable in that man, something good in. him ; but whenever I see anyone going over to tho other aide I know that he is a bad fellow, •nd that there is something wrong abont him." tfou may depend that is how it affects party opinion. If a man comes to our side he never did any wrong in his life— all his misdeeds are wiped out, and he is a patriot. But if, on the other hand, he happens to <liffer from us, nothing is too bad for him, and he should be made an example of in order to intimidate others from ever entering on such a course. Now, gentlemen, I wish to refer for one moment to the Convention held last year. I would say with reference to the speech of mine which caused so much animadversion, that if my viuw of it were taken, 1 thmk it wag a very good speech. — (Laughter.) Seriously, 1 think that uuder all circumBtances, the speech was exceedingly temperate. I say, knowing the feelings I had in regard to the action being taken, which I considered highly injudicious, and likely to damage our position and our prospects as regards the adaptation aud working out of our political institutions, the speech 1 then made was exceedingly temperate. But since it has called forth so much remark, aud since my aotion thereafter pursued has been called in question, I think I may be allowed to call your attention to what took place at the Convention ; and not so much to that as to what was taking place in other parts of the country at the time we were urged to secure what waß to.be the interest of our Province. You know the main thing urged upon members of the Convention was the necessity of doing what we could to secure to ourselves our own revenues. That was the mainspring of the quesiion, to secure our own revenues, and the most practical way of doing that was that we should have separation. Now I do not know whether I did recapitulate the points I took when I addressed you, but I meant to have done so. The points I addressed you on, you remember, were : First, the Canterbury runs ; then the question of Abolition, which I told you I could not see any method of averting, and that the only oourso now open for us was to take the County Byßtem, and endeavour to modify it from time to time so as to suit our circumstances. I then gave you a comparative statement of the amount of revenue that would accrue to thiß Provincial district under the County system, and showed what did accrue under the Provincial system. I also expressed myself against Separation, against asking the interference of the Home Government in our local politics, and expressed my full confidence in this, that we would be able to evolve out of the changes through which we were passing, a form of Government adapted to our circumstances. The Convention met, and the only alteration put before us there was to ask for separation from the remainder of New Zealand. The Convention passed resolutions, some of which were exceedingly injudicious. The firßt was a vote of censure on the Governor ; one was that we Bhould ■end Sir George Grey and Mr Macaudrew Home. Reading the address to that Convention by the light of subsequent events, one cannot help thinking the whole thing must have been a very great fiasco. We are told there, " There is a great struggle before us, and also a great future well worth struggling for." How long did the struggle last ? What was the use of agitating men's minds on an object that was not going to be pursued, that everyone knew could not be pursued ? What I would draw your attention to is this. Let me tell you how the gentlemar who was aßked to associate with Mr Macandrew and ga home to England was addressing his constituents. Here is the address he delivered on that occasion. The Convention was delivered on the Bth of November, 1876, and on the 4th of November Sir George Grey addressed the electors. This is the report which appears of Sir George Grey'B speeoh. Now there are two papers, one, I believe, a supporter of the Government, and one of the Opposition. I will [read a short extract from both reports. The one is as follows :: — •' These people who have lived in a district where the land requires cherishiag shoald rather have something from those who obtain the benefit of the better lands, than be obliged to send something away to them. If there is no common purse the land fund is not common property." Now here is the Opposition paper's report of that speech :— "The good land and the bad must be cast together. Those people who live where the land is bad require nourishing ; those who live where the land is good should send money to the first, because the land is common property" — mark you that. "This is a proposal to which none of you will assent. Themeaningofitisthatfchtjlandshouldbepaid into a common fund, and eve»y district get its fair proportion. If the Colony is to remain one, unless we have one common purse we shall not get our just dues." Upon so rotten a foundation, and upon such a false foundation, I was convinced it was the height of folly to try and form such an alliance as that. Well, gentlemen, we determined to send Sir George Grey Home ; at least the Convention appointed him to go Home, but unfortunately he took ill and could not go. In fact he had no intention to go Home ; he was too wise. The object which Sir George Grey put before himself when he came forward to take a part in our politics — I might here remark that I saw a gentleman who is reported, when speaking at a banquet in Dunedin not very long ago, to have taken credit to himself for having brought Sir George Grey into public life. And with regard to this banquet one would think that members of the Opposition are disciples of the faith that believes the belly is the seat of wisdom— (laughter) — and that if ever you expect to have utterances worth anything, you must go to banquets.— (afore laughter.) I have said that one of the gentlemen who attended this banquet in Dunedin took great credit to himself for having brought Sir George Grey into public life, and that was cheered at this banquet. I ask you what were the aims Sir George Grey set before himself when he entered political life ? No doubt to prevent the Abolition of the Provinces was one ; but there was no doubt also thst tho sneret of hiH poymlarity was his i>*r'.riui.>«tion to ol>tr ; n. '.he Laud Fund ot lha Middle Island. That' has been his programme in every addreßs' that he has

delivered yet. In his petitions to be sent Home, which I have seen, it is set forth that they required to have the lp.nd revenue. Tn them he does not say thoy do not get it, because it is their just due. No, he is too astute for that. The men around him who have been the means of handing over our Land Fund are but minnows in the hands of Sir George Grey. But he has accomplished his object, and no doubt he is now the most popular man in Auckland, as well he ought to be. Well, gentlemen, I have referred to party men, and to what a man who differs from his party may expect when parties are guided by no higher principles than those I have referred to. I presume it has been thought that during the last twelve months — imd I think I can say so without rgotisui — I have received my fair share of their attention. However, I survive it ; I don't think upon the whole it has had any injurious effect upon me ; it has not injured my health much, and, upon the whole, 1 don't think 1 am much the worse for it. But I do think it is much to be regretted that people cannot conduct the public affairs of the country without maligning and crying to injure each other, because they happen to differ in opinion, when that difference is an honest one, each thinking his the best means of carrying out hia particular object. — (Applause.) Well, I have been blamed because I took a Beat in the late Government after the question of Abolition had been thoroughly sealed and settled, because I took a seat in a Government, the policy of which I was quite satisfied with, and many members of which were personal friends of inino for a very long time. It is said that it was a continuation of the Vogel Ministry. Well, that is a fiction. It is said that I took upon myself resposibilities attachingto the Vogel Government ; that is another of the fictions of Parliamentary procedure. Thoßewhoblamedmeweresupporters of the Vogel Ministry, andl wastheiropponent at the very time these things happened, for which they blamed us. This <vas not fair ; but lam quite willing to let it pass. I took a scat in the Government because I believed that* I might be of some service to the country, and I humbly believe I have been of some, notwithstanding what has occurred. — (Cheers.) Contrast the action of those people who declaimed against my taking a seat in the Government because we differed on the question of Abolition — men who were among the strongest Abolitionists in the House, who have since joined those who were aa strong against Abolition — men who urged Abolition up to the very last day. I stated in this hall, and the decisions of the constituencies were obtained, and were acquiesced in by the majority of the Assembly, I should loyally accept that decision, aud endeavour to make the best of it I could for the' Colony. That was the substance of the address I delivered to you in this hall. — (Applause.) I think I have got it by me — the very words I used on that occasion, " It depended very much on the New Parliament whether or no the Abolition Bill should become law. He was free to say for himself, as one of the minority who said that this question should be remitted to the constituencies, that if the electors determine by a majority that there shall be a change, he would be prepared to accept that decision. Of course when Parliament met he would have to vote against the Abolition Bill to determine whether or not there was a majority for it, but he would at once state frankly that he would raise no factious opposition, and so far as his humble ability went he would assist in framing the form of Government which was to supersede the Provincial system. He could assure them that if Parliament decided in favour of Abolition they would have a very arduous task to perform." In the face of that declaration made on the day of my election, I am asked when the qestion was thoroughly tested — not once, but three or four times over — by what I call the party to obstruct the public business, to stop tha business on the Estimates, and to throw the country in a state of contusion. Because I did not do that, because I abstained from doing so after having come to my constituents and telling them the course I have taken, and joined a Ministry with whom in other respects I could agree, I am singled out as a man who is false to his principles. I think little of such insinuations as those. — (Cheers.) I can afford to pass them by. Why, a seat in the Ministry is a great sacrifice to me. If to devote three months of the year to Pa rliamentary duties is a sacrifice for some members, what must a seat in the Ministry, having to attend to business all the year round, entail? But probably these men measure other people's corn by their own bushel. — (Laughter.) Well, gentlemen, I notice that members who have been addressing their constituents recently have been giving their reasons why they voted against the late Government. I think it is time we changed the tune, and I am going to give you some reasons why I opposed this Government. In the first placa, the opposition that was offered to the late Government was unconstitutional and dishonestly conducted. By unconstitutional I mean that they had no platform, no principles that they had agreed upon, so that when they came into power they were forced to ccsept the policy of the Government they had ejected. That is one reason why their opposition was unconstitutional; why it was 'dishonestly conducted was this. They first endeavoured to undermine the private characters of the members of the late Government by insinuations and assertions which it was impossible to refute, because those insinuations and assertions were not made in a specific form in order that they might be refute^, and by leading the people throughout the country to believe that the members of the late Go« vernment had been dishonest aud had been guilty of transactions which would not bear the light of day. If there is any doubt upon that pomt — I don't know whether o* 1 not it will be questioned, because if it is not I need not read more extracts than I require to confirm my position, but there is an article in the Daily Times, with is which incorporated tho Guardian — very muoh the Guardian — which proceeds in a way I shall read to you lin a minute. Insinuations are made in it ! that the late Government were guilty of dishonour.able corduct, of conduct that w^uld ! not bfar the light of of conduct uube1 cftnint'. in fact, ami thai, t mid not be perI formed, by honourable or none&t men. I am about to quote from tho

Otago Daily Times of October 25th :— I " The investigation which the present occupauts of offico are endeavouring, in the face of gigantic difficulties, to make, are causing uneasiness, and it is impossible to suppress the conviction that the late Ministry are afraid of consequences. It does not necessarily follow that, because they arc acting as those would act who have done dishonestly, therefore there are dishonest things to be concealed ; but the similarity of conduct is such as to leave in the mind a moral certainty that the late Ministry have substantial reasons for skrinkI ing from the results of searching inquiry, and, in consequence of this, they precipitate another trial of strength for the purpose of dislodging those who are ransacking official pigeon-holes and accumulating damnatory evidence against the past administration of affairs." Why, Sir, in the face of this, and of the charges that were made, we nave nothing but laudation of the past administration in this House — laudation of the most complete and emphatic kind. The extract proceeds: — "This view of the position will be confirmed in the public mind by knowledge of the grave charges which have been again and again laid, and as often burked, and which the then Opposition were twitted with having made without being able to substantiate them. The possession of power and of documents made the position of the late Ministry impregnable to every charge of questionable transactions ; and being able to afford as little or as much information as they deemed prudent in rotation to any act of alleged malfeasance, they were able to sneor at tho efforts made to get at the bottom of transactions in tho impropriety of which there wa3 a very general- belief. That is all changed now. By a sudden movement, in the sh»rt space of six hours, Ministers found themselves unexpectedly thrust from office, and their places taken by those to whom information on the administration of public affairs had been refused, or given in Mich measnro and in such a manner as merely tended to mißlead. Can we wonder that the accession to office of thobe searchers after hidden things should have sent a thrill of fear through the minds of the oußted Ministers whenever they came to realise their true position ? . . . The making of Ministerial statements has been confessedly delayed by the operation of making searching inquiry — the very thing that is hated of eX'Ministers' souls. Therefore statements of policy must be precipitated on insufficient information, or inquiry must be sut short by ejectment from office. There cannot be a doubt that every hour's delay is an hour of additional danger, for every hour is adding to the damning evidence that is cumulating. We should not wonder, therefore, at the determination of ex-Minis-ters to make an immediate, however desperate, effort to regain control, in the absolute consciousness that a few days or weeks of power and opportunity afforded to their enemies in possession would, seal the exclusion of ex-Ministers from office for years to come." That isapaperin the full confidence of theGovernmentttien moffi.ee. Andthen there were telegrams which I am snre must have been refreshing to you, coming down nearly every day, of new disclosures thafc were supposed to be about to be made ; and it is not long since that I read that there were to be further disclosures. In the House, fully a month after the publication of this article, I asked Ministers "where was all this damning evidence ; where were all those hidden secrets which were to be extracted from the pigeon-holes of the Cabinet room, and what had become of all the charges that were so freely levelled against the late Government in the House ?" I have not yet received a reply to those questions. — (Cheers.) There were charges brought from time to time against the late Government in that vague way, and they were repeated through the Press by means — well, by means understood by some kinds of party-men, but I can say that I was never trained in it and do not intend to be. Then there was the everlasting Piako Swamp sale, which is what I may call Sir George Grey'a political stock in trade. It has served him from his first entry into Parliament. With regard to the Piako Swamp I have to say this. I think it was probably a wrong thing to have sold the Swamp — I do not nay I am sure it was wrong — but it was sold some years ago, when I was in opposition, by the Vogel Government, and waß supported by some who blamed us for it. Why do not they take some of the blame ? It was sold when Major Atkinsou was in England. It was sold, I believe, in the best interests of the country at the time. I have before me evidence which was given by an ardent and strenuous member of the then Opposition — Mr Murray, the member for Bruce — who considered the country had got full value when it got five shillings per acre for this block of land. There were other reasons for the sale oE this land, which weighed with the Ministry of the day, as from a military or strategic point of view. The Piako swamp sale was brought before the Assembly, fairly discussed, and the Assembly declined to interfere in the matter; therefore, I believe it ought to be dropped, instead of being everlastingly raked up for the purpose of obstructing public business, cr damaging Ministers in the eyes of the pnblic, and it has been largely so used. There was another land transaction, tho Waitoa, brought up by Mr Murray. In his honesty of heart, he was not so guarded as those trained gensrals who when they bring charges make them so vague that you cannot take hold of anything, yet they do mischief in the minds of the public. I heard of this matter before it came up, but I knew nothing about it. I was told " there ia a large block ot land that has been sold to Whittaker ; there is something wrong ; and you are going to be asked about it in the House. " Mr Murray did ask a question, and to it I call your particular attention, because I want to show you tho result. He asked the Premier, "Ifit is true that the Government have permitted Mr F. A. Whitaker to acquire Hunia blocks Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4, extending to several thousands of acres, on the Waitoa River?" Mr Murray confessed he was wrong in putting the question, saying that there were so many motions on the paper that ho could not wait upon a motion. He " fished to kr-ow .vhefrhei* t!>>* Oo* prnmont, in allowing Mr Whittaker Lo buy mus land, had. not attempted to evad-3 the decision which the

Legislature arrivedatin 1875, that no exchange with Mr Whitaker should be permitted, and that he should not be allowed to acquire this land which the Government was negotiating for." Mr Ormond made reply that no such permission had been given by the Goveroment. On September 20th Mr Murray brought forward the following motion, which was, I believe, allowed to be brought up as a matter of urgency : — " That a Committee be appointed to enquire into certain land transactions in connection with the purchasing Puninga blocks I, 11, 111, and IV, and other lands in the "YVaitoa district-, by Mr P. Whitaker, junior, and Mr byJatnesMaokay, GovernraentLandPurchase Commissioner, in the purchase or other negotiation in connection with these or other lands in the Waitoa district ; and also any proposed exchanges between Government ani Mr Whitaker, senior, and any alleged sales to one Fraser ; and also to enquire into and report upon the claims of Mr F. Whitaker to compensation for breach of agreement, made between him and the Government on tho 22nd September, 1874, in reference to the land referred to, such commission to consist of Mr Ballance, Sir George Grey, the Hon. Mr Reynolds, the Hon. Mr Stafford, Mr Wakefield, and the mover." On this occasion Mr Whitaker explaiued the whole history of these transactions as they were called. The blocks of land were purchased from the Natives Si years ago. Mr Whitaker was not the purchaser in tho first instance ; the original purchaser had mortgaged interest to a bank, and Mr Whitaker had purchased from the bank. This Committee — four of whom were Opposition, Mr Stafford and Mr Stevens being Government supporters, while I will call Mr lleynolds neutral — reported as follows :—": — " That the exchange -of the lands at Puninga proposed to be given to Mr Whitaker for his claims to the land mentioned in his evidence under the head "Piako Purchases," appears to have been a judicious transaction on tho part of the Government, and should be completed without loss of time. That in consequence of the failure of the Government to complete their undertaking to provide a good title to the land proposed to be given to Mr Whitaker by way of exchange, Mr Whitaker has Jbeeu suojected to loss, and that the Government should take steps to rscertain and settle such loss." That report was brought up on November 27, just before the Assembly broke up, after the searchers for hidden things had been in office for months, with everything at their disposal, and then, notwithstanding the insinuations which had been made, that report was brought up after careful consideration by men who, if they had a bias on any direction at all it would be against Mr Whitaker ; at least it would be with the majority of them, Now, I say that I have established my position, that it was dishonest opposition to the late Government. I wish you, however, not to misunderstand me. I do not condemn enquiry into any question where there is doubt as to the probity or integrity of the Government. I think enquiry ought to be made by members of the Assembly in any direction they may be prompted to make it without the risk of being called to account for what they may say when they honestly believe that the acts of Ministers required to bo enquired into on behalf of the public; but what I do contend against is the continual making of charges which are in no way specific, the making of charges cannot be taken hold of or enquired into or reported — such as has been pursued among members of the Opposition during the last two years. I ask you, gentlemen, to set your faces against that course, or a Fury will rise up that will destroy the private character of a political opponent. I ask you whether we ought not to have such a strong, independent, and heaithy public opinion as would denounce and put a stop for ever to the cry that all is fair in politics. Let it be understood that any man who haß published a slander, or uttered a lie for the sake of party, has been guilty of conduct as reprehensible as if it had been done towards a private individual ; that nothing will justify a man in departing from the strict line of truth, and that what is observed in private conduct should be observed in the conduct of public affairs. I say, gentlemen, let good men of all parties unite in insisting that we should have probity, integrity, and morality in our public dealings. Then in public affairs you will have those influences felt and maintained just as strongly and as well as they are in private life. If you do not do that — the genius of our Constitution is such that every man is more or less mixed up in public matte's — the worst of slanders and the utterance of lies in regard to public matters will permeate the whole community. Men who will not hesitate io lie in politics will lie in trade. I ask you to denounce and put down your foot on such conduct, which I regret to say is too prevalent in the Parliament of New Zealand. Then, I Bay, gentlemen, that the Opposition wasted time purposely and deliberately in needless talk. What was the uso of the kind of talk I refer to ? It was said that our Government could not carry on the business of the country, and were powerless to carry through their measures. The Opposition last session did not attempt to "stonewall," but there were other ways quite as successful of wasting time. If we are to have such conduct, farewell to good Government. The Government of the country will fall to those who will stick at nothing to accomplish their ends. Men of moderation ■will not descend to such tactics. They mugt stand in the background while men who will stoop to such conduct as I have referred to must inevitably be the men who will carry on the public affairs of the country. Now there are two Bills to which I desire to make short reference, and to which great obstruction was offered — I mean the Charitable Institutions Bill and the Settlement of Works Advances Bill. In the Charitable Institutions Bill I took great interest, and I believe it would have been a very great benefit to the country, but we had obstruction offered to it, which I think was unjustifiable. Whenever we got a division on it, we had large majorities for the Bill, but Sir George Grey, accompanied by hia chief lieutenant, I might call him, Mr Reeß, took up thi. whole of the evening on that Bill. In Committee, where you can scarcely control the loquacity of membeis, they took up a j solid five hours without allowing ub to make

a single stage of progress, the objection being that denominations might come in under tho Bill, and get support from the Government for denominational purposes. I did not sea the force of that objection, but the Bill was ultimately abandoned, mainly in con* sequence of this opposition. We have our Industrial Sohool here fairly overflowing, and we are compelled I am afraid to mix there children of well-to-do parents with children who have not been cared for as they ought to havo been, and who are growing up to such an age as to require a separate class of discipline. The object of the Bill was to enable any fifty individuate that would subscribe to enrol themselves as members to establish an institution, either as a hospital, a benevolent institution, or sohool for orphans. The Bill also gavepo^er which is not held at present to enable the managers of our benevolent institutions to sue the relatives of these children for their maintenance in suoh an institution. Well, the Bill was lost. I hope the present Government will take some steps at an early day to bring forward some measure to aeomplish the object intended to be secured by it. Another Bill I had very much at heart was called the Settlement of Works Advances Bill. The object of that Bill was to enable the Government to advance £50,000 which could be expended in opening up new blocks of land, and that a certain proportion should be expended in making roads to be recouped by fixing a certain upset price when the land was Bold. I call that one of the best Bills for the promotion of settlement that could be brought into tht»ll Assembly. I found from experience in Otagc W we were always short enough of monoy, that members had to attend to the interests of the constituencies which returned them, and that no money could be spared from the Land Fund for these purposes. If the principle of that Bill had been applied, the money tor opening the land to be recouped by tho purchasers, it would have been highly ad* vantageous and greatly have promoted settlement. But lam told that was a Bill to buy votes. Mr Bees told us the object of the Bill was to corrupt Parliament ; aud really if that was its object, I think it would have been a pity I should have introduced it, for there was no occasion to go any further in that direction. Now, as > I have said, the charges against the late Go r vernment were that it carried Abolition, and that it was centralising in its tendency. Now I ask what did this present Government do when it came into office in order to repeal Abolition, or to decentralise. I want to quote a word or two from the speech of Sir George Grey in his ministerial statement. If the Government, when it came into office, had attempted to give effect to the repeal of the Abolition Bill, or to find some substitute for the Provincial system, I am not sure but I would have been bound to vote with them, and I would have admired that as candid and honourable. But listen to the speech of Sir George Grey when he came into power. " The great effort, therefore, which I think must be made is to devise a system by which, the whole administration will be grasped by one Government." Up to the day he came into office he was haranguing us on the necessity of Provincial Government, and that we must have a return to the old system. And here is what he says in hia first speech when he came into power. lis k you what consistency is there in that ? I would ask the Hon. Mr Stout whether this is the class of conduot that degrades politics? Here is another quota* tion : — "I will strive to do my best to initiate a policy by which equal laws may exist in this country for all ; laws under which every family may hope to attain its home and it 3 land, and under which the best of the land of the country shall not be - given to the friends of the Government. A new era is dawning, new times are coming, and new men will soon be found in this House, new principles will prevail, and I believe in New Zealand will be established that great principle that all men have equal rights in the property and in the lands of the Colony." Well, gentlemen. I ask what has he done to bring all this about ? He leads tho people to believe there was to be great reforms, while he will not alter Abolition, but is going on centralising further— for he advocates one central Government. I ask you to listen to the speech made at the same time by Colonel Whitmore : — "The Government policy is a Conservative policy, abstaining from all alteration in theexisting state of things in the more important questions of State. Our efforts will be devoted chiefly, if not entirely, to financial and administrative reform, and general retrenchment of our ex* penditure. The Government, for instance, r has no intention whatever of changing the seat of Goxernment or of disturbing the unity of the Colony. We consider that the Provincial system wss swept away by the will of the people, and we intend to accept that decision, and shall endeavour to carry it out loyally." Well, here is one Minister telling the Assembly that we shall have on*, central Government stronger than ever. Hib colleague agrees with him in that, and says they will accept loyally the will of the people. The Premier says : — " We will have re* formed laws, and the friends of the Government are not to get great gifts." But his colleagues say : " We are not going to alter anything, things will remain jußt as they are." I say, Sir, why did they not accept the will of the people sooner 1 Why did they not, instead of calling conventions, creating agitations, and obstructing the business of the country, loyally accept the will of the people, and bring the County system into harmony with the will of the people. If they had taken a course such as that, they would have" found me heartily with 1 them ; but to take this course of obstruction to public business, to rousing the worst feelings of members, and what to attain ? To attain place and power. Theße are the things which degrade politics. Well, gentlemen, the Government has two policies — one which the Premier proclaims from the honsetops, and another which Mb colleagues whisper across the banquet table. For example, Sir George Grsy assures the Assembly and the people at Wellington that they are to have a strong central Govern* ment, with its seat at Wellington. Mr Maeandrew, in Sir George Grey'" presence at a banquet at Dune-din, hints at an alteration in the Coußtitution, in the form of Provincial Government, This Mr Ballance,

ftt Marton, denies, and says that there is bo suoh intention, but that they aooept the will of the people. Then, again, Grey declares we are to have new laws and equal rights ; while Colonel Whitmore asserts the Government is to be Conservative. I may call this the Demagogic and Conservative policy. Now- 1 want to show their inconsistency in regard to the financial proposals. They disputed the correctness of the financial proposals; asserted that they were even falsified; that the accounts were not accurate ; and they continued speeches for day-i ; and terms ■equivalent to "cooked" were used. They also asserted there could be a reduction in the departmental expenditure of £100,000. They were ' pressed to state where thia reduction could be made, and the only answer we could get was, that there must be a large reduction in survey. That was no reduction whatever. A reduction in the surveys of this,, country would certainly not be any gain. In many of the Provinces gentlemen had been ia possession of their land for the last fifteen and twenty years and yet do not know where their boundaries are. Titles are changing hands with the boundaries of the properties not defined, and the public were at great inconvenience for want of roads, the ' Crown right to which was expiring every day for want of surveys. To, speak of curtailing the expenditure in aurveyß was the most extraordinary notion that, ever could have been heard of, and I hope they have abandoned that idea. After all the declamation on our financial proposals the Treasurer comes down and says— " I accept the" financial proposals of the late Government 'j I believe they are thoroughly accurate in every respect." And in respect of the, great reductions, Mr Ballance at Martori Baid— "After careful study he did not believe any further reductions could be made.".. Well, gentlemen, I do not think any reduotion has been made, so that "no further reduotion " will not <go very far. Well; I may quote the words the Treasurer used in accepting' the financial proposals, lest it might be said' l am putting other constructions than his own. He says : — V I feel I

have no other course open to ma at present than to accept the Estimates of Expenditure,nearly as they are submitted."

Mr Reid, in continuing his speech, said thai in regard to legislation the Government had railed against the late Government, and had asked if they understood their Bills. Bat judging from what had taken place since it was clear that the then Opposition did not understand them, and that it was fortunate it was so, because if they had no one else would have been able to. The Government, after all its railing, .had adopted and appropriated the .most important measures of their policy^-n'anieiy,- the Education, Land, Mines, Reiervesj Educational Reserves, and other Bills. '■ Then • again with' 1 reference 'to the Land Fund a great difference ef opinion existed.' If there w«a any one question upon which the' member's of the Province should have agreed it was on retaining the Land Fund to the Province. But the hands

that should have' protected it had given it up, at the same time declaring there was. none to give. When the Bill was before the Houae he had spoken against it; bat the Hon. Minister of Lands, Mr Macandrew, eaid inreply, "the hon. member for Taieri has said a great deal about Ofcago being robbed of its Land Fund, as if that was something new. " It was an accomplished fact, when the Abo-, lition Act, was passed. The thing haa been done by our predecessors, not by us. . . We are endeavouring to get something out of the pie, whereas, by the proposals of the late Government the whole thing was gone. That was the statement by the Minister of Lands, ' but Mr Stout argued in this way — "Under the proposals of the present Government, if the land revenue only came to £200,000, Otago would get £40,000, and thus Otago .would gaiu £20,000." Where, he would now ask; was this money to come from? He would answer these gentlemen from, their own speeohes, a few short extracts of which would show their utter inconsistency. ' Sir George Grey, when he brought in the proposal, gave as one reason, for taking the land fund that our debt,. Was daily increasing, and yet Mr Maoandrew regarded it as an attempt to save something out of the fcie. Then again, Sir George Grey said that by tho adoption of the new system to be established they would deserve the gratitude of the entire people of New Zealand. For what, he asked, was this gratitude and who were making this sacrifice? The people of New Zealand he presumed to be the people of , Auoklarid. He (Mr Reid) ejaoulated,"l am opposed to the principle of this BUl { >"afed Mr' Stout replied, "Yes, and independently of the principle altoge- < ther. The honourable gentleman says to himself, 'The land fund will, not be made Colonial revenue if this Bill is not passed, and if it is rejected the land fund will be saved.' ... If the two Bills are not to be considered together, and if honourable gentlemen who are supporting the generalisation of the | land fund support the honourable member for Egmont in this attempt to force the Land Bill down our throat*, they will lose the land fund." If the Pand fund had practically cone, what was there still to lose, or what assistance could it be to the Colonial Revenue ? Mr, Macandrew at another time said :— " If a uniform land law was necessary at the time when the land revenue was > Provincial, X thick it is infinitely more necessary now in faot, it is absolutely essential — when the land revonne has become de facto Colonial reyinue." He (Mr Reid) could not see the necessity for this if the land fund had really gone,! any more than he could see how they could save. £10,000 by the proposal of the Government. It had been said that certain persons ought to have good memories. He would not name those who should have good memories, but evidently on these * occasions they had been required. He noticed' that Mr Seaton with great;simplicity lately •aid that the Southern men had the best of the Northern in the bargain. But this is a great' mistake. IJnder the old law, the first charge against tho Provincial district was for the amount it was indebted to the Colony for Public Works. And assuming the land revenue amounted to £50,000 and the charges to £45,000, the charges would be deducted. The Provinces that had land revenue above the charges to be paid to the Colonial Government would obtain that surplus for the ftp. district, «$ ajl the Provinces, with $be ,

exception of Canterbury and Otago, would have a deficiency. Mr Seaton had said they were better off because they would get twenty per cent, of the land fund. But he must have forgotten that the provencea which hitherto had not received any land revenue would also get 20 per cent, out of the land fund, and that the deficiency would be borne by the Colony. He did not see how this was to be a benefit to the districts with land revenues. The result of tho proposal would be, if fully carried into effect this year, that the Provincial districts of Auckland, Taranaki, Wellington, Hawke's Bay, .Nelson, Marlborough, and Weatland would receive £131,755 from the Consolidated Fund ; that Canterbury, instead of receiving £215,626, the surplus to which it wouid be entitled under the proposals of the late Government, would only receive £67,760, thus losing £147,866 j and Otago, instead of receiving £112,122, the surplus to which it would have been entitled, would only receive £59,020, thus losing £53,102. The Provincial Districts of Otago and Canterbury would therefore lose £200,968, and the other Provincial districts of the Colony would secure £131,755, and the Colonial Government £69,113 of the plunder. He thought that plunder was the proper term for this. If he had sworn to maintain the land fund as some others had done, and had not maintained it, he would rather have extinguished his political existence, and have retired at once, than to have been a party to a transaction such as that appears. It was right that he should say that under the proposal of the late Government there was to be a charge of £109,000 against the land fund of Otago. This was necessary, as there was a deficiency in the estimates owing to the large amount of public works beiog carried on in different districts which were not yet reproductive ; and aa the Government was undertaking the cost of education and other charges. The question before them had been one of additional taxation, or of working some such arrangement as this. He noticed that wherever the Premier went and spoke of additional taxation the people cheered, and threw their hats in the *ir, and beoame oxuberant. He understood that taxation was'generally objectionable, and that it was the duty of Government to enable the people to keep as much money in their pockets as possible for the promotion of industry and the development of the country. It had not been his wish to see a new system of taxation proposed this year, and that was the, the reason he had agreed to the proposal of the loan upon the land revenue, aa by that meanß the Colonial revenue would be relieved until the next year, and they might probably be enabled to do .without taxation. The loan to be charged would have been for repayment in .theoouiße of some 20 years, and he firmly believed it would have been a wise and judicious course to take by anyone who wished to preserve the land revenue of Otago and ab the same time prevent the recurrence to taxation. With respect to the Land Bill, he stated that the clause which had interfered with the working of the Bill was no offspring of his, and that the Bill, as he submitted it, was one of the most liberal land v laws extant. Mr Reid defended the action taken with regard to the Canterbury runholders, contending that the Government had simply kept faith with the lessees, and that private owners would have acted dishonourably had they adopted any other course under Himilar circumstances than that taken by the Government. He considered Sir George Grey was open to severe censure for having attempted unconstitutionally to get' the Governor to disallow a Bill which he had not opposed from his place in the House further than by simply declining to vote upon it. Sir Gaorge ,Grey had discribed the measure as a fraud upon the people of New Zealand, and if this was the case the Premier had betrayed the interests of the people by not rising in his place in Parliament and opposing it. He considered the strong language used by the Premier was quite uncalled for. For 20 years they had lived under a nominated Waste Lands Board, which was an element in the Bill to which Sir George took a strong exception. Whatever Sir George Grey might have stated to his colleagues regarding his opposition to the Bill, he had not opposed it in the House. Mr Reid strongly condemned the Crown Land Sales Bill, which had the effect of increasing the price oi land and retarding settlement. Of course he could not argue ,the matter legally, and Mr Stout had said that this Bill was all right, but the judge here was of a different opinion, and the Waste Lands Board wast considerably ■hampered by it. He could not tell on what authority the present Government party had assumed the title of liberal, and he considered thoy had very little claim to it. He likewise condemned the Government for .opposing the visit of 'Sir W. Jervois and Col. Scratchley to report upon our defences. He admitted that it was expensive for the Government to maintain two steamers, but the late Government had kept the Hinemoa laid up, whereas the present liberal Government had employed her extensively in carrying all and sundry on pleasure excursions. One of the members at last session had moved for a statement of the travelling expenses of the late Ministers, and he hoped that that member would prove hia impartiality by making a similar motion next session. Li concluding, Mr Reid spoke of the tone in which debate had been carried on, and personal recrimination indulged in during the session, and characteriseditas being degrading. For this state of thing, he laid the blame on the present Government party, and Baid that the House had deteriorated as regards the character of its discussions sines the advent of Sir George Grey. On Thursday next he intended to address the eleotors at Outram on parts which he had not touched on in this address. He concluded by intimating that he should forward his resignation of his seat to the' Speaker of the Assembly. . In answer to a question by Mr Allan,

Mr Reid said that he had always been in favour of the Strathtaieri Railway, as he had alwaya looked forward to the time when the interior line for Otago would be carried in that direction. He gave reasons why he did not support Mr Pyke's Bill, and said that if his suggestions in the matter had been, acted upon Legislature would have

stood committed last session to the construction of the line.

Mr Allan i As no one appears to have any questions to propose*, I beg to move — "That this meeting hears with regret Mr Reid's intimation of his intention to resign his seat as a member for the Taieri district, and requests him to reconsider his decision with a view of continuing, if possible, to sit as member for the Taieri." — (Loud cheering.) In moving a motion of this sort I do not expect everyone in the Taieri to be satisfied with everything Mr Reid has done in the sixtaen or seventeen years he has represented the district. In fact it is impossible he could have satisfied everybody, but I am satisfied, and believe thoroughly thifc everyone in the Taieri who haß watched Mr Reid's actions while he has been a member of the Assembly must be satisfied that he has fulfilled his duties as the representative of the district with honour to himself and credit to his constituents. I have known Mr Reid for a very longtime — havehad the honour of working with him in another place — and hare always found him looking thoroughly iv to every matter that comes before the House. He makes up his mind only after the fullest consideration of a question. Ho is very earnest and attentive to his duties. He could never be suspected of doing any underhand work, but is is straightforward and honest in all Irs actions. As I did not oome here prepared to say anything, I will just move the resolution I have read. Mr John Shaw seconded. The motion was then put and carried unanimously, amid considerable cheering. The Rev Mr Will said it was impossible for the electors to forget Mr Reid's past servioes. They had known him from his youth, and had walohed his proceedings in and out of Parliament, and they had found him every inch a statesman. —(Cheers.) Mr Reid had done his beßt to carry out the political views he held, and if the whole of his constituents did not approve of his politics, they would at least give him credit for honesty and sincerity of purpose. — (Renewed applause. ) It was impossible to say what turn the political wheel might speedily take. Not many years ago the Premier was burnt in effigy in Dunedin, and it was not so long since he was tho most unpopular man in New Zealand. — (Hear, hear.) Mr Reid was perfectly fitted to represent them, and he trusted he would forego his resolution, and consent to retain his seat. There was one thing in which he differed from him — in faot a portion of his remarks which he did not believe.— (Laughter). WB»n Mr Reid told them he oared nothing about office or politics, he (the speaker) simply did not credit the statement. He believed Mr Reid was in bis element when he was in the House, and to take him out of Parliament would be like taking a fish out of water. — (Laughter). Mr Murdoch said he thought Mr Reid would not be fulfilling his promises to the electors if he deserted them at the present juncture. — (Hear, hear.) He had told them Parliament was getting more and more oorrupt, and this was one reason why Mr Reid should stick to it, lest it should get worse.— -(Laughter.) Mr Reid was an honest politician, and the elector.* would not go far wrong in requesting him to retain his seat. He had, therefore, much pleasure in supporting the resolution.

Mr Reid thanked the meeting for their resolution. It afforded him much gratification to hear such expressions of confidence. Mr Wills appeared to have Bligh'tly misunderstood what he desired to convey when he Baid that he did not care much for politics. His desire had been to benefit his constituents and the people of tho Colony. When he entered the political arena he believed he could do good, and he thought he had benefited tho«e he represented. His colleagues and himself had often been jeered at for clinging to office. It was only natural that they should do so ; every party clung to office. The same party that used to jeer at the late Ministry for clinging to office when they had a majority, no sooner secured office themselves than they clung tenaciously to it with a minority. — (Hear, hear.) Reference had been made to his lobs of office, but he could assure them that office was to him a greater sacrifice than being out of it. He did not pretend to be anything but a poor man, and it must be recollected that when he was away at Welliggton he had two homes to provide for. This was a serious matter, and private considerations of this character weighed with him to some extent. He really feared that he would not be able to reconsider the decision ha had come to. There was one thing he had almost neglected to do. Ho had to tender his best thanks for the kind consideration, forbearance, and support he had on all occasion* received from the electors of tho Taieii. But as he had stated he feared there was not the slightest possibility of his altering his intentions. Ho had long been of opinion that he could not continue to represent them, more especially after Abolition had been obtained. In con* elusion he had again warmly to thank them for their highly flattering recaption. At the request of Mr Reid a vote of thanks was passed to the Chairman and the meeting terminated.