The Timaru Herald. SATURDAY, MAROH 11, 1893.

Timaru Herald, Volume LV, Issue 5658, 11 March 1893, Page 2

The Timaru Herald. SATURDAY, MAROH 11, 1893.

We shall ia this article conclude our notice of Mr Rolleston's speech. In alluding to the Land for Settlements Act, by which the Government are empowered to expend a sum not exceeding £50,000 m any one year m the purchase of land from private owners, the leader of the Opposition said that he did not think it a proper thing for the State to invite offers, as is being done, but it should decide on the localities, choose the most suitable land, and then take it from the owners at a fair valuation. It is clear that Mr Rolleston's remarks point to amended legislation, for under the Act of last session the acquisition by the State of land for settlement is subject to the consent of the owners, and of course there must be agreement between them and the State as to the price to be paid by the latter. Mr Rulkston recognises that it is becoming advisable for the State to make purchases here and there for the purpose of closer settlement, but be has said on various occasions that it is a system which ought to be carried on with the greatest caution, and [not pressed too far. Moreover, if we remember rightly, he holds that Parliamentary sanction (a resolution by the ' House of Representatives) ! should be necessary to the completion jof each purchase. He also, we believe, thinks it essential that the State should, with certain limitations, have the power of "taking" the land for settlement, just as it is taken for public works, the price being settled by a competent tribunal if the parties — the State and the private owners — cannot agree. At present, however, Parliament is not likely to move m the direction of making the sale of private land for settlement compulsory, nor do we tbink that there is yet any pressing necessity for a change which would undoubtedly induce a feeling of insecurity m regard to the freehold. Mr Rilleston said be hoped that the Government would exercise the power given them uuder the Land for Settlements Act, and that the mouey would be speut judiciously m these districts where settlement was needed, and not merely with a view to buying up the estates of certain large land-owners. It is a hope which everyone m this part of the colony must share. It is worse than useless baying inferior laud and putting small- settlers on it. In such a position they would drag out a miserable existence, little removed from pauperism The speech contained a reference to the Native laud question, and the neceesity for dealing with it promptly, but Mr Rol leston did not enter upon a criticism of the legislation proposed by the Government late m the course of last session, further than to remark that "no one could understand their Bills." As to the management of the railways, he said " there was no doubt that the question of State interference was coming up, but be did not consider that the railways could be properly managed when State influence could be brought to bear upon the administration.!' But that is exactly the point which the Minister of Public Workß is anxLbus to attain, and which he will strive for when Parliamenfc meets again. The Aeu> Zealand Times, the Government paper m Wellington, says: — t( When Mr Rolleston's friends heard that he had rashly determined to tempt Providence by trotting out oratorical powers he does not possess, they were sorrowful. Tbe rtßulb- haa justified their fears, and perhape—certainly if they care anything for bis reputation — inspired them with a hope that the much-vaunted stumping tour may go no further. When every word that an Opposition leader says can only add strength to tbe Government, silence becomes for j him doubly golden. Mr Rolleaton has ' received a hint that he has a goldea

opportunity for reserving himself en. tirely for the session. If his party is wise he will embrace it, and if his own wishes are consulted he will do so eagerly." Such Billy commentary is hardly worth noticing. Mr Rolleaton's friends have given no sign of their sorrow, and, as far ac we can learn, they are very much pleased at the enccess of the Auckland speech. Tbe New Zealand Herald, a much weightier authority than the New Zealand Times, says : — " The meeting m the City Hall laet evening to hear an address from the Hon. W. Rolleston, the leader of the Opposition, was one of the moßt successful we have had m Auckland for a long time. It cannot be said that at the present period any political question is exciting intense interest or causing popular excitement. Mr Rolleston has no fame as an orator, and indeed his manner of speaking is more adapted to Parliament than to a popular assembly ; yet there was a crowded house to hear him, including a larger proportion of ladies m the dress circle than usual. It was evident from the first that the supporters of the present Ministry had mustered m considerable force, but the vast majority of the meetin? were determined that Mr Rolleston should be fully and fairly heard, and an attempt at interruption was found to be impossible. Mr Rolleeton indulged m no personalities, and, mdeed, his speech was not a markedly parly one. He dealt with every qnestioa broadly and honestly, showing that the- welfare of the colony was with him always the mopi prominent consideration. It would indeed be well for New Zealand if it had* more politicians like Mr Rolleston —like him m high education and capacity, m patriotism and disinterested zeal ior the public welfare. No man who has been so long m public life has pursued a more unselfish course than Mr Rolleston. He has established a claim to a favourable hearing m any part of the colony.''