Mr Kinross Replies.

Southland Times, Issue 5003, 13 August 1884, Page 3

Mr Kinross Replies.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, — As I have convinced you that there is a considerable difference in our political views, I would not have troubled you again, if my meaning had not been misunderstood on an important point. When I wrote that I considered "Reformer" w >uld b 3 a more accurate designation than. " Liberal," I meant it to apply to the party, and not to myself individually. I consider a Liberal is one who advocates measures which are more for the benefit of others than for his own advantage. As it has been my custom to puisne this coarse, the term Libsial when applied to me would be as accurate as Reformer. For instance, if free education by the State were abolished, individually I would be a gainer thereby, but I support its continuance from patriotic motives, believing it to be for the good of the colony. However, if a man who has a large family to educate supports free education because others will have to contribute towards the cost of educating his children, I think it is not correct to call him a Liberal for so doing. Gladstone, Bright, Chamberlain, Sir George Grey, and other leaders who advocate measures that benefit others, may fairly be called Liberals ; whilst those members of the party who receive the benefits, may be more accurately termed Reformers. You tell me there are no working men who are members of the British House of Commons ; that only proves tbatrit wants reform : a model Parliament should contain a fair proportion of representatives of every interest in the community, Although you term my political views " destructive," whenever it is desirable I am prepared to prove that they are Hound, just, and philanthropic— l am, &c, Axdw. Kinross. Myross Bush, 9th August, 1884. [In our opinion Mr Kinross only gets himself a little deeper in trouble by the dia- [ tinctions elaborated in this letter. According to him, it seems to be both liberal and illiberal to support the present system of education ; so it would be just as accurate to call it an illiberal measuie as a liberal one —an odd result of his ratiocination. But when men are so snpremely happy in their consciousness of superiority as our correspondent is, it is almost a cruelty to disturb their complacency, We suppose if we call Mr Kinross a Liberal Reformer, and grant that nobody else can be such who disagrees with him, we Bhall pretty correctly enunciate his political creed. 80, with his leave, we shall let the matter rest at that in the meantime.— Ed. S.T.]