THE HON. J. MACKENZIE AT PALMERSTON. (From Our Special Reporter.)

Otago Witness, Issue 2310, 9 June 1898, Page 54

THE HON. J. MACKENZIE AT PALMERSTON. (From Our Special Reporter.)

Palmehston, June 1. The Hon. John M'Kenzie, Minister for i lands, addressed a meeting of the electors of in the Public Hall, Palmerston, last evening. There was a crowded audience, and ihe first six forms were occupied by ladies. The Mayob (Mr Gill) presided, and in introducing Mr M'Kenzie said the present JMiniater for Lands had served them for nearly 'a quarter of a century, and he believed that he bad done so to the satisfaction of his constituents. The Hon. Mr M'Kenzie said that his duties «b Minister and a* member were much interwoven, and in both capacities he claimed to nave always endeavoured to' the best of his Ability to act in the interests of the masses of the people. There were, he said, two sides to every question, and as the papers circulating in the district persistently presented cve r ything that could possibly be detrimental to the Government "he claimed the right to reply to the charges, and to leave the electors to judge. The jGovernment was continually assailed by poli- i tical opponents, by a large section of the press, ! by the P.ress , Agency, and by the National Association. There was, he asserted, no free jpresb in this r district. A large portion of the press w*s, he said, simply in the hands of the financial institutions,' and anyone who dared to »».}•' anything detrimental to those .institutions Would be maligned by the Tory press of Dun-" pdin. There were none but Tory papers in Dunedin, for those who supplied the papers with advertisements', would boycott a Liberal paper, and bad done so in the past ; and he jrnew that in assailing the press he was giving ihe press a handle to attack him, but he cared nothing for what the press said about him. 3?he Precs Agency, which waa largely supported by concessions granted by the Government to circulate correct information, wap made a political tool in the hands of the opponents of the Government. The National Association was active in the circulating of leaflets and pamphlets for the purpose of injuring the Government. The Government had not the means to do this, and it would not be right to do it if they had the means, but the National Association had the means because, as they would see if they looked at the list of officers of the Dunedin branch, .they would find that they were the Bond street gentlemen who found the means of employing ptoplf to jmalign,and slander, the Government. The] only policy of the opponents of the .Government was abase and misrepresentation. The Opponents of the Government bad signally tailed as prophets, and the Government had proved that men from the ranks of the people could administer the 'affairs of the country Wisely and manage its financed, with success. All that was left to the opponents of the government was SLANEEE AND MISEKPBESENTATION, and many were tho slanders that were circulated. One of the, most recent instances of this waß contained in the speech . of the late candi- ! date of the National Association. Mr Ward, | at Mataura, was asked if Mr Seddon was paid for all the portfolios he held, and the answer ■ waß,'"He is not likely to work for nothing." That reply was evidently made to create the Impression that Mr Seddon was drawing more J than one salary, when, as a matter of fact, no] matter how many portfolios a Minister held he i could »only draw one salary. And then Mr Ward went on to say "Mr Seddon boa received joublic money at the rate of £1000 a jear

waß con*

I dutiDg the 18 years he had been connected with politics ; and before he got into office he and Mr Pish belonged to the • Skinflint ' party, but as soon as he got into power he raised salariesall round, and as Mr Seddon has made £18,000 in a few years you can see he has not lost much ■ time." — (Laughter and applause. ) Now there could not, the Minister said, be a crueller 1 slander or s greater political lie than that. Mr Seddon for 11 yeara out of the' 18 years had been a private member, and had only received the same honorarium as any other member. Then coming to his seven years of office he had received a salary of only £800 a year during five years of that tima, and for two years £1000 a year. That was, Mr Seddon had received £6600 in salary during the seven years he had devoted the whole of his time to the public, and had had to keep up the position of Premier and put his hand in his pocket for all sorts of. charities. The Premier had, he could assure them, saved very -little, and yet tha Opposition candidate for Mataura had the audacity to tell his audience that Mr Seddon had saved £18,000. It was his (Mr M'Kenzie's) duty as a member of the Government to put thesß matters right, because the majority of the press would not put them right, nor would the Press Agency do it. Then the accusations that Mr Seddon had J belonged to the Skinflint party and that he had raised salaries all round were equally untrue. The Miuisters were receiving now the same salaries as, according to the law of the land, were payable when they took office, and though the Opposition had on various ocensions asked them to raise the Ministerial salaries they had ■ not done so, because if they had that would have been made a platform cry against them by members of the Opposition, end their opponents would have got into office and would have received the benefit of the increase. The Government was not going to be had in tbat way. — (Applause.) But the people must nob suppose that Mr Ward, the Opposition's latest candidate, had himself manufactured the misstatements He probably believed them to be true, and the fact was they were made for him by the National Association, which was continually providing pabulum of this description for the use of its candidates in all parts ef the country, , so that it was well to take statements made [ against the Government with » grain of salt. , The Minister next referred to the statement ; in an Auckland paper bo the effect that the , Premier was an enormously wealthy man — worth something like £50,000. Mr Seddou L had felt muoh aggrieved by that statement, and , had offered to show bis bank book «nd to ! entirely disprove it. Bat was it not & degrad- , | ing position that tho Premier of the colony , 1 should h&ve to go into the details of his own , private affairs to remove from tha minds of the . people slanders published Against him ? Unless I this public put their feet down on this sorb of , thing the time would come when no honest , poor man would dare to take office in New Zealand. All the Ministers were acoused of j much the same thing. As for himself, he declared he waa not * wealthy man, but were there any present who would say that after spending in the service of the public 27 of the ■ best years of his life he ought to be in ; such a position that he should be de- ■ pendent upon others for his -bread? If , he had sufficient to keep him in bread I and batter in the evening of his life he did '■ not think even his opponents would say that ' was wrong. — (Applause). And it was not to s his position as a Minister of the Crown that :,j he owed the t'aofr that he bad sufficient to i \ keep him from want, but to the care and mii ! dustry of his family, who had looked after his affairs while he was absent attending to his • public duties.— (Loud applause,) The speaker then dealt with tha

I _ CHARGES OF COKBUPTION i .' 'brought against the Government, and contended ' that not even the semblance of corruption had i been or could be produced ag-unst their administration, nnd that in the matter of ap- . pointments fitness and not colour had t been considered. Criticising Mr Rollegton's > ; speech he said that the charge that the Govern- . j ment had robbed the people of their liberties I simply meant that the Standing Orders- of the , • House had, during the present Administration, 1 baen amended by Parliament on the recomi ; mendation of a seleot committee, for the pur- • j pose of stopping stonewalling and preventing the delayof public business. The alteration ot the . Standing Orders was to the disadvantage of the i Government, and as an instance he mentioned i that on one occasion he had been compelled to 1 reply in 30 minutes to 30 speeches, so that he had just a minute in which to answer each balf- ; hour speech. Another chargaTllr Rolleston made was that the Government interfered with the right of the people to return their own' representatives. That meant --that became the ■ members of the Government replied to false and libellous statements they were interfering with the righti of the people, and that it was i the duty of the members of the Governmeat to remain in Wellington and to allow all kinds of misrepresentation and the utmost distortion of facts to pass unchallenged. He was sure the people would see that that would be unfair to i themselves as w^ll as to the Government. — (Applause.) The next accusation was that the Government had acted unconstitutionally in taking a vote of £7000 for the Parliamentary j Building*, commencing work that would 1 cost £40,000. , Now the plans for this work had been laid before, and api proved by a -select committee. It was known that £7000 would not cover the cost of the work, ■ and it was the usual course to obtain a vote to • 'cover tho expenditure prepared during the i current financial year. The same thing was done id connection with railways and other publio works, Mr Rolleston had accused him of attacking the judge* of the colony. Well the s attack referred to was. made from that platform upon Judge Conolly/who had first attacked him : from the Bench, He held that he was entirely justified iv what he had done, and i said that; if a judge attacked him wrong- , fully in connection with the discharge of his i duties as a Minister of the Crown, he ; should, admonish the judge from any platform in the- colony. — (Applause.) As to Bushy Park, Mr Rolleston had said that that was a blunder worse than a crime. The i insinuation wa» that the sons of the Minister - for Lands were guilty of a crime. He chal- ' lengod Mr Rolleaton to come out into the open . *nd acouoe them of a criminal action, and he > should have an opportunity of proving it in the i Supreme Court. — (Hear, hear.) Then Mr Rolleston made a deliberate political lie on the i platform in laying tha M'Kenzie boya had nob f been called apon to pay a sixpence before they [ were allowed to ante; into possession of Bushy : Park. As * simple matter of fact his sons » paid between £2400 and £2500 before they : were allowed "possession ; and yet Mr Rols leston Raid they were not asked for i a single sixpence. The aoiiing leader of • the" Opposition said that he (Mr M'Kenzie) f was afraid to go to his own district on thk I question. Well, he was before them and waa I talking about it, and would like to see the i audience he would be afraid to face. — • (Ap- > plause.) The statement made at the same ; time that he had promised at the time of the > election to cut up Bu3hy Park was also em- ■ ' phatically denied, and the Minister said that i two years before his sons thought of the i property it was reported upon by the Land : j Purchase Commissioners as unsuitable for ftefctififuent jwrjjoeeik ft»£- fchexoflorfiu. ftoeordios

to law the property could not be pnrch&ied by the Government for settlement purposes. It was circulated all over the colony that bis two sons had just come out of school, and that their father was doing the whole thing and was only using their names. Tho&e present, however, knew that his son§ were married men, and why should they be debarred from having a bit of land to make a home for themselves. — (Applause.) The next accusation made against him by Mr Rolleston was that he had rnada a political board of the Advances to Settlers Board by shunting the Solicitor-general as ohairman of the board, and placing himself in his position. The Solicitorgeneivl, however, never was chairman of the board, and never was a member of ib eveD. He (Mr M'Keuzie) also only became a member of the board by an act of Parliament appointing him to tha position ; bub he 'never was chairman of the board. Then Mr Rollestoii said that Mr M'Ketzie aod Mr Seddon mu-.t be spending a lob of money travelling the country, but that when Parliament met the Opposition would get no return. Now a return of travelling expenses had been laid upon the table of the House ever since the present Government came into effice, and Mr Rol'eslon knew that perfectly well. The law also provided what Ministers could draw for travelling allowance, and it coufined them to an expenditure of £1000 a year. If they tried to get 6d more they would be pulled up by the Auditor-general. Mr R'-Oldaton. ought to have told his hearera tbat. when he, was Miuister for Lands ho did not pet a paltry £800 a year, but that he got £1250, and also that he did not draw 30s a day for travelling allowance'but got £2 a day. —(Applause.) He now came to Mr Scobie Mackenzie. They all knew that that gentleman was the

GKEAT OBATOB OF THE OPPOSITION, and lately he h«d been sent specially up to Auckland'to throw a shell amongst the National "Assets" of Auckland. That shell was charged with corruption, hypocrisy, humbug, and im-, posture ; but without 'any resu't whatever. About nine or ten days ago he (the speaker) was referring to. Mr Scobie Mackenzie's celebrated speech, and the Press Agency sent what he said away, and it was published in the Wellington papers ; but it did .not suit the Otago Daily Times to publish what he said in regard to Mr Scobie Mackenzie's speech. No ; it was coming too near dangerous ground, and the Times cut it out. Mr Scobie Mackenzie wanted to make out that he -(the speaker; was not a Liberal, because on one occasion he voted against the one-man-one-vote bill introduced by Sir George Grey. Hs was not going to say that he did not do that, but when it became a question of praefcal politics and- was introduced by the Government he supported the bill. Then the great orator of the Opposition went on to say that several members of Parliament who entered as Conservatives became Liberals because they saw something coming their way, and so changed their opinions. They would imagine from what Mr Scobie Mackenzie said th*t he had never turned his coat &t all. But in 1881 that gentleman contested the Mount Ida seat with Mr DeLautour, a Liberal member, in the interest of the Atkinson party, and was defeated. Three years afterwards Mr Scobie Macbeczie again etood for Mount Ida, on this occasion as a Liberal. Why did he become a Liberal ? It >^a<3 because he could not get into Parliament as a Conservative, and he then hoped that bis glib tongue would convert all the people in hia 1 own district to his own way of looking at matters. In 1884- they again found " Scobie" contesting Mount Ida in tho interests of Sir Robert Stout and Sir Julius Vogel, and he got elected, and when the House met he was chosen to move the Address-in-Reply Jo the Speech from the Throne. J Mr Scobio Mackenzie en that occasion made a most laudatorylspeech of tha Government. Ona year afterwards they found him turning round, and two years afterwards he supported a vote of noconfidence in the Government which he belauded two years before. Then when Mr i Scobie Mackenzie was subsequently elected for Mount Ida the Sfccu~,- Vogel Government had no more bitter enemy than the elected candidate. After he was elected he supported the Atkinson Government, but two years afterwards he supported a vote of no-conQdence in that Government. Then Mr Scobie Mackenzie said the first thing the Opposition would have to do was to give freedom to the civil servants of New Zealand. The civil servants would, however, not thank him for that statement, which implied that they were slaves now. There' were a large body of civil servants who did not care what Government was in office, and he (the speaker) could say that he never heard politics mentioned by the officers that he came in contact with in Wellington. When Mr Scobie Mackenzie accused thsm of being downtrodden, he was doing the civil servants a great injustice. They were as free as they could possibly be, to do what they liked when an election took place in Wellington. Mr Scobie Mackenzie accused the Go7ernmenb of departing from the v first principles of finance because they had a aurp!,u3, but if they looked back to 1887, when Sir Julius Vogel and Sir K. Stoufc had a large deficit, they would find that Mr Scobie Mackenzie used exactly tha same words. He (the speaker) would like to know what Scobie's principles of finance were. Nine out ten people weuld say that the proper principles of finance were to have a good balance at the bank, and that was his opinion. Did' they think the Government were gathering mote taxes than they had a use for ? The question was — Was the surplus necessary to carry on the works of the country ? Could they carry on public works without money? CertaiDly nob. That was the reason the present Government always kept the finances high. Mr Scobie Mackenzie, the speaker went on to say, was not now looked upon seriously by anybody. Even his owa friends said 11 You cannot take him seriously upon any ocoasion." However, it was to ba hoped he would improve, and such lessons as he (the speaker) had given him might tutor him up a little and make him a little more careful. The speaker proceeded to say that another accusation brought against the Government was that they had departed from