THE Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR O'CLOCK P.M. Resurrexi. FRIDAY, DECEMBER 10, 1875.

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2164, 10 December 1875, Page 2

THE Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR O'CLOCK P.M. Resurrexi. FRIDAY, DECEMBER 10, 1875.

During the past two days we have had telegraphed from Christchurch two speeches, each in its way a fair epitome of a different side of the snme question j each remarkable for vigour, apparent sincerity, and much of common sense, "and both happily free from a needless display of party invective and groundless .abuse, which js too frequently to be met with in the orations of the partisans of either side. The first of these is that of Mr Kolieston, Superintendent of Canterbury; the other, that of the Hon; E. .Richardson, the Minister of Public Works. Mr Kolleston, as iriduty bound, approved the doctrine of the Provincialist party, but. at the same time gave utterance to views replete with such common sense as is not frequently met; with in speeches on his

side of the question. He considered Abolition undesirable, but while justifying the strong measures lie and others with him took in opposing it last session, declared that if he now found that the constituencies were in favor of it that he for his part would offer no factious opposition to it. This is satisfactory, though it is more than probable that having onco made up their minds on the subject neither the Government or the constituencies would suffer a " factious " opposition long to retard the progress of the country; and the calculation made in the Auckland Star as to the amount of time which it is possible to waste in debating and dividing on every phrase aad every other -word of the Abolition Bill has been made in vain. But the after part of both speeches are strangely alike, and comingas they do from speakers so discordant in nominal opinions the likeness if real as well as apparent is no small cause of satisfaction. Provincial Councils according to Mr Eolleston have grown vastly beyond their proper size, but still something of the sort is wanted; and this something Mr Eichardson tells us will be supplied by a Local Government Bill now in the . course of preparation which will at once divide the colony into shires, these shires to be composed as far as possible of the present Koad Boards. So far the ideas of either party maybe made to agree. Mr Eolleston tells us, what all are prepared to admit, that something must be made to supply the place of Provincialism, which, if the constituencies wish it, he is content to ! see defunct. Mr Eichardson tells us that we shall have a Shires Bill to supply this very want, and it therefore but remains to be seen whether the proposed bill will supply it, and in what way. If it can be made to do so—and there seems jprimd facie no just reason why it should not—the centralist and provincialist may yet be seen on the same side striving together for the common good. One reason giren by Mr Itolleston for supplying the void left by the abolition of the provinces is well worthy of notice. Me tells us that one of the greatest problems.of the Mother Country is to establish a form of Local Government which may relieve the central parliament of functions which it ought not to be called upon to discharge. This is, no doubt, in a great measure true, and looking at the immense number of bills now introduced, which are relegated from one Session 'of Parliament on to the next, it ia apparent that some such means must be adopted, or Parliament, even by sitting day and night all the year round, will soon be unable (if they go on increasing in the same ratio) even to read through the bills annually presented, much less devote to to them that time and consideration which many of them require. Some form of Government, subservient to the General Central Government, it is, as it has been all along, patent that we must have; that form Mr Eolleston clamors for, and Mr Eichardson informs us that the Government are prepared to supply. Another prominent point touched on by Mr Eolleston, and treated of by Mr Eichardson, is Education, and this i.t is also satisfactory to see that both consider of great importance, so important indeed that the former of the two speakers declares it to be more so than Provincialism. We could have wished that Mr Eolleston had said more on this subject than he appears to have done, for it is a question which Provincialists and Centralists alike shouldhandleinno uncertain manner. The question of where the endowments are to come from, so as' to enable us to have one efficient form of secular, compulsory education all over the colony, has, according to Mr Bichardson, afforded food for much talk, but, if the matter be properly gone into, the schools, to a great extent, in the thickly populated districts may be made to be almost self-supporting, and in the districts where aid is required, as it will be in some places, we agree with Mr Bichardson that much may be done from the saving of that money which the Abolition of Provincialism, if properly carried out, is bound to effect. These are two points of the two speeches, which, on the whole, we deem to be eminently satisfactory. Mr Eichardson's explanations and promises are opportune to the minds of those who were becoming rather impatient to hear more of the details of the plan by which the Government propose to supersede Provincialism, and Mr Eolieston's fair and: impartial concession of praise where praise may, after all, be due, strengthens in the minds of all the hope already fostered by some of the utterances of Sir George Grey that such talents as belong to these two eminent leaders of the opposition will not. be lost to the country through an empty clinging to that shadow whose substance has now, wo hope* altogether departed.