SEPARATION.

Timaru Herald, Volume V, Issue 110, 16 June 1866, Page 3

SEPARATION.

The following correspondence on the separation of Wanganni from Wellington will, we think, be ! found ot' interest to onr readers. We extract it from the Chronicle : — TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE SEPARATION COMMITTEE, WANGANUI. Wanganui, May 23, 1866. Dear Sir — As Member for the district m the General Assembly, I wish to ascertain how tho question

of Separation at present stands. I Lave therefore the honour tf> inquire whether your committee; intend to take any steps m the matter, and if so, what they intend to do. — I have the honour to bu &c, John Bjiyck. Wanganui, June 1, 1806. to john eryce, esq., m.u.k. Dear Sir, — Your note of the 23rd ultimo has been under the consideration of the Separation Committee, and I take leave to submit to you their views thereon. The members of the Committee are as strongly impressed as ever they were, with the necessity of obtaining the separation of the Wanganui and ltangitikei districts from Wellington ; they are not wedded to any particular way m which this object should be attained; they do not seek Separation for its own sake ; but they are quite persuaded, from all that has takeu place, that there never will be a. just appropriation of public money for the wants of those districts, or a useful and economical expenditure of such sums as may be granted, until a system of local management and control is substituted for that which at present exists. And the Committee believe that they would not be doing their duty to their constituents if they ceased to labour, by all fair and legitimate means, for the accomplishment of a change so desirable, being convinced that the progress of this important part of the colony is very much dependent upon its being obtained. It is humiliating to have the local members of the Provincial Council suing, m something like forma panperis, for grants of money to which the districts are entitled as their right on every principle alike of expediency and justice. But m the meantime the Committee arc not insensible to the fact (which they have no wish to conceal from themselves or from the public) that there is much apathy on the subject — a state of feeling, which it is neither difficult to understand nor explain. Various causes might be mentioned. One class of persons, for instance, who desire separation, shrink from the revival of an agitation which would lead to an opposition as unscrupulous and embittered as that wliich was evoked on the last attempt to obtain it; another class, equally desirous of the same thing, refuse to take any overt steps for it 3 obtainment, because they think it would be foolish, judging from the past, to expect such a thing at the hands of the General Assembly, while men of parliamentary influence are opposed to it.

Thus the matter stands at present. The report of the preceding Committee pointed out two methods by which Separation might possibly still be obtained. (Ist) The revival of the question of the legality of the decision of the Government on the lirst Separation petition ; or (2nd) a new petition to the legislature. With respect to the latter <ti' these methods the present Committee give no opinion m the meantime. As regards the former, they believe that the decision of the Government was flagrantly unjust, and that the settlers were fully entitled to separation m accordance with the prayer of their petition. Nothing but a gross perversion of justice could have pre vented its being granted. But a considerable time has elapsed since this petition was presented, and the Committee now pause for some indication of present public opinion regarding it, holding that it would be neither proper nor expedient to outrun the wishes of the settlers m a matter of this kind.

It was asserted by the f miners of the New Provinces Act, and has always been admitted by those who approved of the creation of New Provinces for the purpose of securing more efficient local government and a better administration of public revenue, that the question of separation ought to be decided by a clear and undoubted majority of the electors within the proposed district. Such at all events is the opinion of the present Wanganui Committee, an opinion, m which I have reivson to believe you concide. And the question before the Committee is, not whether the electors of Wanganui and [langitikei wish for separation, for the Committee have good reason for knowing that they do wish for it; but the other question, under al) the circumstances, and considering the bitter opposition they would have to encounter, the electors will bestir themselves and go through a certain amount of trouble and agitation to obtain what is wished for. The Committee do not think that a majority of them, owing to the causes already stated, would be inclined to do so at present, and the Committee have no wish to urge them. Any movement to be successful must be largely spontaneous. The Committee therefore simply wish to bide their time. They have no little doubt that ere long the misrule of Wellington will once more rouse the most apathetic of our settlers to action, and that a demand for local government will be brought before the General Assembly m such a way as to insure its being complied with.

The Committee, as I have .already stated, are not wedded to any particular mode of obtaining local government, — it is the substance and not the form they arc contending for,— and perhaps it may occur to you that something m the direction they seek might be effected by extending and improving existing municipal bodies, anil by having some machinery for setting up hoards of an analogous character m the rural districts. Those would, at least, be preparatory to the abolition of provincial institutions, the complexion to which wo must come at last. But this is too large a subject to enter upon m the closing paragraph of a letter, and I only suggest it for your consideration. — I am, &c. T. lIARrER, Ciiairmau.