The Temuka Leader. TUESDAY. JANUARY 19,1886. POLITICAL CORRUPTION.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1456, 19 January 1886, Page 2

The Temuka Leader. TUESDAY. JANUARY 19,1886. POLITICAL CORRUPTION.

The speech delivered last Saturday evening by the lion. Mr Larnscb to his Dunedin constituents was in many respects like Mr Ballance’s speech at Wanganui. He showed that, notwithstanding the boasted economy of the Atkinson Ministry, they were more extravagant than either their predecessors or successors. Our own opinion is that there is not much difference between them. They are all ready to practice economy, to pass liberal laws, and to spend money only on productive works until they get into office; then a sudden change comes over them, The Civil Service remains unaltered ; not one officer is discharged who is not replaced by another; the liberal laws consist principally of some miserable amend ments of existing ones; and jobbery, con option and extravagant borrowing and expenditure go on just the same as ever. Major Atkinson’s Ministry were just as extravagant as the present one ; while it is doubtful whether they were so able, so intensely patriotic, or so honestly inclined. Mr Rolleston was a good Minister of Lands, but during his administration land passed into the hands of Messrs Whittaker ami Russell, and others of the same class, over which there was good deal of warm discussion. We have not beard a breath against Mr fiallance’s land administration so far, A great deal was said of Mr Bryce’s Native administration, but bis success sinks into insignificance beside the magnificent way in which Mr Ballance is managing Native affairs. Mr Bryce kept the Natives quiet by means of an armed force; Mr Ballance’s “ one policeman policy ” has succeeded not only in restoring peace, but also in creating a feeling of friendship between the two races. Surveyors are now allowed to go over the King Country unmolested, and both races have combined together to prospect there for gold, As regards Sir Juans Vogel, we have never thought much of him, but, without a question of doubt, he is a more able financier than Major Atkinson. Looking at New Zealand politics from an independent point of view, we come to theconclusion that the difference between the past and present Governments is that while the Atkinson Ministry were preaching economy they were practising extravagance, while the present Government tell the country openly and honestly what they are doing, and what they intend to do. One has tried to rule by systematic juggling : the other is doing the same thing openly, and we must confess we prefer the latter. Had Major Atkinson remained in power, there is not the slightest doubt but that he would have raised another loan, and spent as much money as the present Administration, because he could not have got on without it. He would have bad to provide means of purchasing the votes of those who are sent to Parliament to get something for their own districts. It is all very well to throw the blame of maladministration on

Governments, but n-ally and truly it ought to be saddled on the electors themselves. The electors make corrupt representatives, and they in turn make corrupt Governments. Io most constituencies ho representative has a chance of re-election unless he has secured the expenditure of some public money in his district, and no Government has any chance of retaining their seats unless they have the money with which to purchase such representatives’ votes. That is what is rendering Governments corrupt : and judging from the length of lime Major Atkinson retained his position he must have been no mean hand at carrying out this policy. There is no doubt hut that this is true. Mr Posllelhwaite, than whom few more honestly inclined ever sat in Parliament, characterised some of the acts of the Atkinson Ministry as Yankee log-rolling; Mr Sutter also spoke in unmeasured terms of the corruption which he witnessed. Mr Sutton, of Napier, said ; “ I sold my vote, and that is what I got for it,” pointing to some local work. Major Atkinson would have been buying political support to this day only that be met more than his match in Sir Julius Vogel. There was no other man could do it so unblushingly. There is only one conclusion to be arrived at, after having studied both side* of the question, and that is that it is like the chimney-sweep who accused the baker of being dirty for either parly to charge the other with corruption or extravagance. Both are guilty of the same offence, but on the whole we must confess that the present Government’s way of doing these things appears to ns far more honest than Major Atkinson’s.