South Canterbury Times. FRIDAY, AUGUST 18, 1882.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2932, 18 August 1882, Page 2

South Canterbury Times. FRIDAY, AUGUST 18, 1882.

The determination with reference to the appropriation of the funds, now in the hands of the Timaru Wrecks Relief Committee, arrived at by last night’s meeting of contributors, will, we think, be generally regarded as a sound one. It is, substantially, as expressed in Mr Hamersley’s amendment on Mr Wakefield’s motion, that the Trustees shall administer the fund, both principal and interest, as may appear to be most to the advantage of the sufferers by the calamity of May 14, —any balance that may thereafter remain in hand to be devoted to the relief of distress caused by future shipping casualties in this port. The first proposal was to invest £I2OO, so as .to insure a revenue of £IOO per annum; and retain the additional £3OO that would moat probably be in hand to meet urgent and unexpected contingencies—the annual £IOO going to support those needing continuous assistance. But the mover did not make it clear that he meant the capital sum to be used also, as necessity arose, and this omission the amendment supplied. It is clear, as one of the speakers pointed out, that the functions of the trustees would not consist merely in relieving present or temporary distress and need. They had to consider that the children who have lost their fathers have lost all prospect of the substantial help the father might have been expected to afford them on their going out into the world, in appreciating them, and in fitting them out for business, and the trustees,' standing in loco parentis , must do what they can to supply this aid. That is one of the most important claims on the fund ; and the majority of the subscribers not unnaturally, took alarm it the idea that after affording merely immediate relief to sufferers j the balance should be put aside as a fond to provide for future casualties. The money was subscribed for the relief of sufferers by the disaster of May 14. There was no thought in any subscriber’s mind when he gave his money, of future calamities and there was nothing to warrant the Trustees in providing for such out of funds collected for present needs. The proviso that any surplus shall go to the relief of sufferers by future casualties is almost a needless one. For when all claims (including present relief and future provision) are fully met, the fund will have been expended and there will really remain no surplus at all (or only a nominal one) for appropriation to any other purpose. The duty of the Trustees is undoubtedly to provide for these sufferers and to take no thought for probable ones in the future. The same humanity which prodided for these will also provide for those. The resolution to commemorate the heroism of that, fatal day by a public monument, and to apply £l5O to the purpose, is a most praiseworthy one. For it will be a source of pride to the inhabitants of this borough for all time to remember that this town produced, when occasion required it, men of the grandest courage and self-sacrifice, and the monument to the memory of those who died in the endeavor to save the lives of their fellows will be among the treasures of the colony and will be shown to their children’s children with pride. How much this community owes the members of the Provisional Trust can hardly be overrated. Not only have they taken grave responsibility and? given valuable personal service cheerfully, but they have exercised peculiar discretion in ministering to the comfort of the fatherless and the widow. They have (and they know they have) the grateful regard of their fellow citizens, the approval of their consciences, and the thankfulness of those to whom they have ministered.

Mr H. S. Fish, the Member for Dunedin South made a very telling speech the other night on the no confidence debate. Some of those who heard it declare that it was the best party speech of the session. But, unfortunately, its effect was a good deal marred by the hon. member’s kicking over the traces, as is his wont when attacking an opponent. For a Parliamentary man to assert that another hon. member who is unfortunate enough to differ from him in opinion, is “ suffering from softening of the brain,” that he has “ taken leave of his senses,” that he is “ approaching to lunacy ” is in execrable taste, and quite intolerable. Why Sir Maurice O’Eorke allowed him to go on in this vein without calling him to order, is not very clear. Possibly the Speaker, whom no one could accuse of entertaining a scintilla of sympathy for- coarseness of this kind, thought such a speech would inevitably bring its own condemnation, as indeed it did. When Mr Fish entered the House a good many people, on both sides, predicted that he would, before very long, be in office; or failing that, that he would make his mark as a leader. He has, as yet, done neither. The fact is, Mr Fish has a keen incisive faculty which enables him to grasp in a moment the real state of the case, and to ont away all extraneous matter. We

know no public man in the colonies who has better perceptive powers than Mr Fish. But with this be has the mast barefaced impudence, the most utter disregard of the feelings of others, the utmost contempt for their opinions, and an absolute intolerance of contradiction. The position he takes up towards an opponent is this :—Do you not see this matter as Ido ? Do you differ from me ? Bah 1 then you must be a fool, a drivelling idiot. Now it takes a man of the rarest talent a very long time to obtain (not a hearing, let ua say, but) even toleration in any assembly ; a man of greater cultivation than Mr Fish. Consequently, no party in .power would care about taking up this explosive gentleman until time, experience, and a few smart rebuffs had put him down and toned down some of his native ferocity, unless that party were men of his own kidney, and. those surrounding him were of equally low proclivities. Fortunately the New Zealand Legislature with all its faults is at least an assemblage of gentlemen ; at any rate the gentlemen are sufficiently numerous and powerful to constitute the House in matters of behaviour. The only public man of our acquaintance who is to be compared with Mr Fish is Mr W. M. K. Yale, a well-known “ baleful ” star in the legislative firmament of Victoria. Sheer brass and effrontery, and a hectoring, bullying style, added to some natural acumen, raised Mr Vale to political office. But it was only on the tide of Berryism that he rose. In a ministry like that he was in congenial society. Such a cabinet has never yet been known in New Zealand and we trust it never may. If Mr Fish would be a political success he must cultivate a little of the smviter in modo.