The Poverty Bay Herald. AND East Coast News Letter. PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. WEDNESDAY, MAY 4, 1881.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume VIII, Issue 1312, 4 May 1881, Page 2

The Poverty Bay Herald. AND East Coast News Letter. PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. WEDNESDAY, MAY 4, 1881.

Op the many pre-sessional speeches with which the country has been deluged, perhaps that which has caused the most stir itt the public mind, and a considerable flutter in the Ministerial camp is that of Mr. Ormond, member for Clive, lately delivered at Waipawa. The address evidently is meant to be a hostile manifesto against the present Ministry, albeit Mr. Ormond assumes the role of a friend ; and it roust be admitted that in the capacity of a very critical and candid friend he plays his part to perfection. He spares no commendations where they are deserved, nor does he withhold censure when according to his view it is merited. The whole policy of the Government since it was admitted into office is reviewed in an able and trenchant -manner. But, withal, his utterances must necessarily lose the weight which would otherwise attach to them, inasmuch as he is speaking not as the mouthpiece of any party, but solely as a censor desirous of fault-finding in matters affecting policy, with which he may be at variance with the present occupants of thr> Treasury Benches. To a gn.uv \::.^tc:jiii his attack— for such it is held to be, will be ineffectual, and will not be endorsed by the country ; principally for the reason that Mr. Ormond cannot clear himself of the imputation which will arise of selfseeking ambition, ab the expense of sacrificing his friends. His peculiar position, no doubt, gives special interest and importance to his views, while his address affords incontestable proof of his political sagacity and ability. Wherein then does his weakness as a speaker lie ? Can it be in his unreliability or independence.

At the commencement of last session, he was reckoned among the staunch supporters of the present administration, but before its close he succeeded in alienating himself from his party by his free and ruthless criticisms on their financial and general policy. . Although the member for Clive has no love for them, it would be absurd to think that he would take the post of leader of the Opposition. Indeed, we should take the opinions of Sir George Grey and Mr. Ormond as politicians, to be antithetical on any given point. It is to be regretted that by his instability he is unable to command a sufficient following, and that his voice is that of one crying in the wilderness ; for on many subjects his views are sound, though too rapidly liable to undergo a change. When the old system of Provincialism was doomed, he was one of, the i most eager to put the axe at the root \ of the tree. Now, Mr. Ormond ques- 1 tions whether the County system which has supplanted it was after all the alteration needed, and whether the change is not for the worse, instead of better. This need pot be wondered at, when we consider the exalted status Mr. Ormond occupied "under the Provincial rule, and the power and patronage which' he then wielded. Whatever sighs of regret may be raised on this score it is certain that the country will not revert to Provincialism.

Among some of his remarks which will be generally approved will be those with reference to the pioposed Charitable Aid Bill, and the acquisition 'of Native lands. With respect to the first, his opinion was that the subject was one of great importance. The (jfovernment proposal was to raise money by vote, arid in the end, though not just at first, ratepayers would have control of the funds. Many members urged that it would be a great reproach to a young Colony to impose a poor rate. They could, not shut our eyes to the fact that there were poor and sick people amongst us who must be provided for. He did not think that these should be left to be relieved' by charity. These had a rig^t to demand relief, and sentimental feelings'about a poor law should be put on one side. He therefore thoroughly agreed with tlie movement. Touching the native policy of Mr. Bryce Mr. Ormond said that with parts of it he did not agree. He disagreed, for instance

with the bill proposing to stop all native land sales except through the Government, believing that such a

measure was not practicable, it being calculated to put a stop to settlement. In the North Island, there are at present some eleven millions of acres held by natives which do not in any Avay contribute to the good of the country. His opinion, in a few wordsj was that it is the duty of the Government, first to set apart ample lands for all requirements of the natives, and that done, to facilitate in every possible way the passing of these lands to Europeans, so that they might be brought into cultivation and bear their share of taxation: as well as increasing the productive powers of the colony. We had now arrived at that stage of affairs in New Zealand when there was nothing to fear from land speculators acquiring property and allowing it to remain idle. \