THE LOCAL POWERS AND FINANCE: BILL—MAJOR ATKINSON'S OPPOSITION.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 5361, 14 July 1885, Page 2

THE LOCAL POWERS AND FINANCE: BILL— MAJOR ATKINSON'S OPPOSITION.

MINISTERIALIST PLEDGES. SIR JULIUS VOGEL'S CLAIM—CONFLICTING OPINIONS. >SIR JOHN HALL'S BKTURN— WHAT ' PEOPLE SAY ABOUT IT. WELLINGTON, Jult U. There is some talk to-day of opposition to the Local Bodies' Powers and Finance Bill. Major Atkinson, -who is a thoroughly consistent politician, and a firm believer in a measure 1 he has been instrumental in placing on the Statute Book, naturally objects to the repeal of the Roads and Bridges Construction Act. That measure ho upheld for years against the opposition of his own party ; and if it had not been, for his own perseverance and toughness, it would never have got to the Statute Book. One of the clauses of the Govenunemt Bill especially repeals the Roads and Bridges Construction Act. That is the clause which Mr Orniond, Mr Montgomery and others have made particular mention of at different times, as necessary to be passed. Now as Major Atkinson thoroughly believes (party consideration entirely apart) that the Roads and Bridges Act gives the best means of developing couutry resources, and has proved itself the most satisfactory of all measures of local finance, he is sure to resist its repeal. His party is also sure to go with him. That none of the Ministerialists will go over to the Opposition in this matter may be taken for granted, if there is anything in the pledges of a unanimous caucus. I hear privately from various members of the caucus that their pledges may be depended upon even considerably further than appears on the face of things. In fact, I gather that up to yesterday there was a considerable increase of loyalty in the lately mutinous Ministerial camp. To-day all Wellington is talking of the claim to be put forward on behalf of Sir Julius Yogel, and talks on the subject very freely. The Opposition are, of course, expected to take the same view as the Government of Sir John Hall took, namely that Sir Julius, as Agent-General, was not entitled to anything more than his salary for all kinds of work, including services in connection with the raising of loans, however valuable they might be in themselves. There are, on the other hand, many of the members who are in favour of a fair and complete investigation. The question is, what was the contract between Sir Julius Yogel and the Government of the day ? As the cool-headed member for one of our Canterbury electorates has just put it to me, every man, no matter what his position, is entitled to a fair investigation on publicgrounds of any claim he may have under any agreement with the representatives of tho public. This is fair enough. On the other hand, there is the question of expediency, which has two sides. One, as an independent, non-politician said just now to me, " Government cannot afford to run risks. This is another big stone wall. The other is, that Ministers having been rather "put upon by their own people, there iB a slight j reaction on their own people's part, and ; now is the time." This is refined philosophy. The plain fact of course iB that the question is not a Ministerial one nt all ; but plain facts and political opinions do not always agree. In this connection I may ns well send you down the names of the Public Accounts Committee. They are Mr Moss (Chairman), Major Atkinson, Messrs Ballancc, Barron, Bradshaw, Cowan, Dargaville, Hislop, Montgomery, Newman, Peacock, Wilson, Yogel and White. Whilst the various views aro pending their various exponents, it will be as well for the public to bear in mind that Sir J. Vogel's main object in allowing thie. matter to be brought forward, is tho very prudent one of getting his evidence placed upon record. Ho has never abandoned hie j claim* as all the world knows, nnd W [ wants, in the event of anything happening

to himself, to leave everything in order for Ida family. ' The report I sent you yesterday about flir John Hall's return to New Zealand, tarns ont to be correct. It has the very -aabatantial foundation of a letter from Sir John Hall to a member of the House quote the Wellington morning journal), expressing his intention of returning in three months, and at once re-entering Parliament. The Ministerial side has not much to say, except that Sir John is not any more a name to conjure with. The Opposition and its friends Bay that three months hence it will be too late. "We can't keep them in long enough to do what we wish. Sir John ought to be telegraphed to, to come at once, or it will be too late." This is what an observer of events said of the Opposition attitude. I have just ascertained that the member of the House to whom 3ir John Hall has written is Mr Wakefield, and that Mr Wakefield says it is quite true that Sir John is coming ont. j Both Mr Wakefield and Major Atkinson deny that it is Sir John's intention to seek re-entry in politics, as his state of health is such as to prevent this.