The Temuka Leader. TUESDAY, JUNE 16, 1885. THE GOVERNOR'S SPEECH.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1353, 16 June 1885, Page 2

The Temuka Leader. TUESDAY, JUNE 16, 1885. THE GOVERNOR'S SPEECH.

The present Government evidently do not believe in the old saying that “ there is nothing succeeds like success” ; they feel that a little audacity is also necessary. In the Governor’s speech they have taken a hopeful view of the state of the colony, and have asserted that the depression which existed when they last met shows “ signs of passing away in some parts.” There is certainly a little truth in this; the depression whicii was experienced by some of the occupants of the Treasury Benches when they met last year not only shows signs of passing a wav but passed away long ago—when they began to enjoy an income of £1250 a year, with free houses, free nil way passes, and travelling expenses ab libitum. We can fully believe that the depression lias passed away so far as they are concerned ; in fact, we believe, it never reached the Treasury Benches, for Major Alkinson did not believe in it when he was in office. We believe it is everlasting prosperity with the occupants of these Benches—a life of perpetual bliss—a sort of region of “ calm delights” where the storms of winter are never felt, and where an eternal summer gilds the whole creation in the most beautiful and gorgeous colours. The weather cannot affect their £1250 a year; they are not dependent on the capriciousness of markets ; they are always safe, and they must of course feel that there is no such thing as depression. There is certainly no depression on the Treasury Benches, but beyond them it is undoubtedly more intense than ever it has been, and it is nothing short of impudent mendacity to say anything else. It is impossible that an improvement could have taken place. There is no appreciable improvement in the price of wool ; there is no increased prosperity in the mining industry, and grain is almost unsaleable. In the face of these facts, how is it possible that the depression could pass away 1 and is it not a shameful thing for the Government to put in the mouth of Her Majesty’s representative impudent falsehoods of this kind ? They have done so in the hope that they may bo able to show that the prosperity of the colony has returned with Sir Julius Vogel’s return to power ; they expect to be able to throw dust in the people’s eyes, and make them believe that the colony is prosperous when it is not, but they will find this a very difficult undertaking. The men who are over head and ears in debt, and yet cannot sell their gram, will not very readily believe this ; the grain merchant who cannot do anything in his own line, the merchants and storekeepers who cannot collect the moneys due to them from farmers; the laborers whom the farmers cannot employ, and the many

others dependent on our agricultural and pastoral industries will bo found very sceptical on this point, aid will not be easily persuaded that the derressiou hug decreased through the instrumentality of Sir Julius Vogel. As for the balance of the Governor's speech it in not worth reading. Jt is the most emp'y coHimn and a-half of matter we have ever perused. From a literary point even it is a poor production, and,if the telegraphic report of it. to hand is correct, it contains bad grammar. However, that is a sm-dl matter which we would be most willing to overlook if any indication of the po'icy of the Government had been given. This however, has not been done. The speech is a weak, wishy-washy production capable cf uvmy constructions, and altogether unworthy of notice.

THE GERALDINE EMBEZZLEMENT CASE. Alfred Fisher pleaded guilty to the crime of embezzlement, and is now suffering for h's offence. We have not one word to say against Fisher, but there are circumstances connected with the case to which we desire to refer. Fisher was dismissed on the 27th of October, and an information was laid against him on the 3rd of the following January; or, in other words, about two months were allowed to elapse between the discovery of his crime and the law being put in motion to punish him. Fisher's friends made a great deal of this: they wanted to show that the prosecution was got up through spite because he had ioined an opposition paper, and they tried to make him <pos& in the light of a martyr. He admitted unreservedly that he had embezzled the money of his employer, yet certain people held that, notwithstanding this, he was deserving of sympathy, and that to prosecute him was spiteful. Now, let us put the question fairly to these people. Taking the matter from their own point of view that is, that the law was set in motion through Fisher joining an opposition paper—what are the facts 1 When Fisher was dismissed there was not one word spoken of an opposition paper, but immediately afterwards it was talked about, and when it made its appearance he was its accredited agent. In the letter sent by him to the prosecutor asking for mercy—which letter was read at the inquiry in the Geraldine Court—he promised not to write one word for the paper, and not to have anything to do with it, and still when the paper appeared he was most industrious in pushing it. Let any of those who tried to injure the prosecutor and gain sympathy for Fisher in this matter put themselves in the prosecutor's position, and ask themselves how would they like this 1 Through the clemency of the prosecutor Fisher was still at large, and instead of feeling grateful for not having been long before arrested he tried to ruin the man who had so far allowed him his liberty. Did Fisher deserve mercy when he showed no appreciation of it, and when, instead of feeling thankful to the man who had so far been merciful to him, he was doing everything he could to provoke him ? The man who could have put up with Fisher further than that point would have been either a fool or a saint, and the prosecutor leys no claim to being either. Now, looking at the matter from another point of view. When Fisher was dismissed it was not known that;his defalcations were so large, and the prosecutor kept £9 19s of his wages, believing that sum would be sufficient to cover them. The prosecutor did not pounce upon him and kick him out of his office the very moment he found he had embezzled his money, but gave him a week's notice and £4 of wages that were due to him. Was that treating Fisher badly] It Fisher's defalcations had only been £2O or £3O he would never have been arrested, but this was not so. On the 24th December, Fisher's successor had returned to this office a 'list showing, defalcations to the extent of £4O, and since then we have found that the total amount unaccounted for is about £BO. Who could put up with this ? Would those who condemned the prosecutor aa spiteful allow the man who defrauded them of £BO go unpunished 1 Let them ask themselves this, and, if they do, we think they will not be in such a hurry to sympathise with crime in future. The real cause of the arrest of Fisher having been so long delayed was that hopes were held out that his friends would pay the money. They got time enough to do so, but they did not avail themselves of it. Any fair-minded man will admit that Fisher was treated with great leniency and patience, and that it was very unjust and unfair to accuse the prosecutor of having treated him harshly.