THE Temuka Leader. TUESDAY, JANUARY 29, 1895.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2769, 29 January 1895, Page 2

THE Temuka Leader. TUESDAY, JANUARY 29, 1895.

\ k-k, m co-.., satellites Another of Sir .Robert a.. ■ .1 ! has beeu illuminating the p01ii.10... 1 mament with the corruscatious of his mighty giuiiis. Mr Earnshaw opened the ball iu Dunediu with a speeeh so mendacious that no one had the temerity to follow on the same lines. Mr G. J. Smith ha? now delivered to his Christchurch constituents a more nonsensical speech, but not so dishonest as Mr Earnshaw's. Both gentlemen are of the carpet-bag type. The only stake they have iu the country is sufficient conceit to supply the whole population of the colony. Both have grievances against the Government, for both have been excluded from the councils of the Liberal Party. It is said that Lucifer occupied a very high position once, but through pride he fell to a level which leaves him no hope of a return, and consequently hia aim ever siuce has been to do as much mischief as he can. This indicates the position of this brace of politicians. Their pride, their arrogance, and their the dippleasure of the Liberal Party, who expelled thorn, as unreliable members, aud now their policy is to do as much mischief as is possible. Some of Mr Smith's

speech is funny. He denounces the Government vehemently because they demanded obedience from their followers on policy questions. He says : " By doing away with Party Government he did not mean doing away with parties, because as long as reforms had to be made there would be parties to make them. Bu during last session Party Government was carried to excess and members were driven again and again to vote against their conviction to save the Ministry. It appeared to him that if the representatives of the people were to be waxen figures to dance when the string was pulled all that would need to be done would be to advertise ' for members of the House ; brains are not required, and private judgment is strictly barred.'"

This is funny gibberish. He would abolish Party Government, but he would not do away with Party. Then every one of the party could go on his own hook; there would be no cohesion, but any amount of confusion. But the beauty of the whole thing comes in when he denounces the Government for not making the Licensing Bill a Party question.

" The statement was made that members were to be allowed to vote as they pleased on the question (Licensing Bill). That was a nice statement to make. If the premier wanted the Bill put through he would have put on his boots like he did on other occasions and have feent it through. But when Mr Lawry, the Government whip, got stuck the Premier gave him the tip and helped him -so that he could stonewall. (Laughter). Upon the Licensing Bill it had been reckoned that 315 speeches were made by 47 members, and of that number 72 speeches were made by •members more or less in touch with Temperance sentiment.

Thus Mr Smith condemns the Government for having called upon their supporters to carry their chief policy measures, and denounces them for not forcing their supporters to carry the Licensing Bill, and he cannot see the incongruity of the position. Mr Smith is a shallow, superficial man, who cannot see how illogical he is. Mr Smith was very much disappointed because the first Parliament elected by women was so corrupt as to support the Seddon Government. He sees good in everybody but in ihe Government; the Conservatives are more Liberal than they are, and yet, notwithstanding all this, the only charges he can make against them are the Sergeaat-at-arms business and the famous Clause 21 of the Alcoholic Liquors Sale Act. We have, so frequently exposed the unfairness of putting these down as acts of corruption that we shall pass them by with the remark that even if they are true no Government ever sat on the New Zealand Ministerial benches whose hands were cleaner than those of the present Government.

Mr Smith iudulges in the stereotyped gibberish about extravagant borrowing. He approves heartily of the Land for Settlement Bill, bit condemns as extravagant borrowing—plunging he calls it—the £250,000 to pay for the land taken frr settlement. Mr Smith wants a Government that can make bricks without straw. He approves heartily of buying land, but would not give the Government money to buy it. Then Mr Smith approves of the guarantee of the debentures of the Bank of New Zealand, but condemns as borrowing the amount guaranteed. This is logic! But he is only a parrot repeating the utterances of Sir Robert Stout. Mr Smith has no objection to the Government buying Native land, but they must not have any money to buy it with. To sum up, Mr Smith is a Prohibitionist, and consequently opposed to Mr Seddon. All Prohibitionists are opposed to Mr Seddon, just because they want Sir Robert Stout to be Premier. It is all a part of a deep-laid scheme to place Sir Robert Stout in Mr Seddon's position. This is the prohibition craze, but if they reflected for one moment they would remember that Sir Robert Stout haß been Premier and did nothing for them, while under the Act passed by Mr Seddon the cause of temperance has been greatly advanced. As for the accusation that r Seddon did not make the Liquor Bill a party q? es^on > h 0 would have been very foolish if he £*<i ckme so. There were prohibitionists on each side of the House, and the fairest thing was to treat the matter as nonparty, and let every every member vote as he pleased. Mr Smith says that Mr Lawry, the Government whip, was put up by Mr Seddon to stonewall the Bill. He knows that this is untrue; he knows that Mr Lawry has since resigned the whipship because of this question, and if he is so anxious for the purity of politics he ought to keep as near the truth as he can. The temperance people may possibly return Mr Smith again, but he need not expect the vote of any true Liberal.