POLITICAL REFORM ASSOCIATION.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 5991, 28 July 1887, Page 3

POLITICAL REFORM ASSOCIATION.

Meeting at Linwood.

Sent Home Once More.

A Lively Termination.

_ A public meeting, called by the Political JKeform Association, was held last night in the Oddfellows' Hall, Eaßt Belt, which was densely crowded.

Mr H. Toomer, Chairman of the Linwood Town Board, was called to the chair, and asked a fair hearing for the speakers.

Mr H. Thomson first addressed himself to the financial conditions of the country, and the necessity for retrenchment in the Government Departments. He would begin by reducing the salaries and allowances of Ministers, by which means upwards o£ J£oooo a- year would be saved. He also advocated a reduction of the number of members of the Lower House, and of the salaries of those remaining. ("Why did you not do it while you were there?") (Applause.) It was one thing to propose, and another to carry out. As for the Upper House, he would do away with their payment altogether. By these means, there was a possible saving from the Houses of Parliament alone of £24,480, or, with the deductions from Ministers* salaries and allowances, of .£30,000. Now, the last Parliament threw out the Financial Statement of their predecessors as being too extravagant, so .they had no excuse for saying they did not know the condition o? the country. When the finances were in that state, why did the members vote themselves .£2lO each . for seven weeks' work ? (" Ask Dan Eeeee.") (Applause.) Mr Reese owed them (his constituents) an account of his actions, ho owed him (the speaker) none. If he had been a constituent of Mr Reese's, he would have asked an explanation long ago. (Hear, hear.) With, reference to the interruptions, he would say that those occupying the platform had no desire to exclude anybody who wished to make his opinions known. He would not go closely into the education question, as he was not an export, but he was told by a gentleman connected with the department that the expenditure for the current year was e&timated at ,£4lt>,ooo, and that without impairing the present system JE30,000 a year coukl be saved. ("How?") With regard to Freetrade and Protection, he found, on speaking with so-called Protectionists, that they were simply Prohibitionists. He considered that 16£ per cent was sufficient Protection for any local industries. The imposition of prohibitive duties would defeat itaelf, for revenue from imports would cease, and taxation by other means would have to be made. It was claimed for Protection that it would make more work and higher wages. Ho had spoken to a manufacturer who had made this statement, and asked him how he could account for it. The manufacturer said if lie were freed from English competition he would employ more men and turn out more goods. Ey and bye some of his men wouid leave him, and begin business for themselves; and, by turning out their goods at a lower price, would, bring down his prices. The o\itcome would be that a much larger quantity of goods would be manufactured, but at a much lower profit, and he failed to see how that would bring higher wages. The railways were not properly managed. The cost of travelling had been increased, and passenger traffic had fallen off. A business-like management of the railways was required. He wished to say, in conclusion, that he was glad he was not an elector of Linwood. He was a stranger from another district, and they had shown their spirit of fair play by giving him a fair hearing, though aouie of them differed from his opinions, and he thanked them for that hearing. (Loud applause.)

Mr H. O. Tripp -would make a few remarks uppon the question of borrowing, which it was one of the canons of their Association to put a stop to in future. He was a stranger to most of those present. He was born in Canterbury, and had received his early education here ; but he had been for seven years in England, and had been back here- one year. ■ If you wanted to find out what was wrong in a house, go outside and ask, and you would soon be told. Your neighbours were always ready to tell you what was wrong with you. Soit was jyith a country. In England he had sounded the minds of many influential people about their opinions regarding New Zealand, and had found their opinion to be that the country had gone into debt too fast. Men with capital were deterred from coming to New Zealand by reason of its heavy debt. Mr Tripp declared himself a firm believer in Freetrade, and justified his belief at considerable lengLh, in spite of repeated interruptions. On informing the meeting, in conclusion, that it was his maiden speech, he was accorded a hearty round of applause.

Mr Q. I/awrenson, after asking for a hearing without interruption, said fche Reform Association had been subjected to much abuse and misrepresentation. Its members were as anxious for the good of the country as the members of the other Association. He wished to contradict four assertions that had been made against the Reform Association. Firstly, it was said to be a Freetiade organisation. This waa false. He himself was a Protectionist, and believed in the system by which, as Mr Reeves said at Woolston, local industries had attained to their present dimensions and success. (Applause.) He believed that far from tho Association being a Freetrade body, not one in twenty of its members could be called Freetraders. (Hear, hear.) Then it was said that the Reform Association wished to attack the national educational system. Well, when a letter appeared in the papers over the signature of one of theiv moat respected members, Mr Chrystall, denying that the i Association wished in any way to impair ! the educational Bystem, he thought that was sufficient contradiction to that allegation. Some of their individual members ' were in favour o£ raising the school age to ! 6even, and of cutting off tho sixth, or even : the fifth standard, but they were 'a very j small minority. The third accusation was ! that they were the supporters of the " stratocracy." This was untrue, for ho, and, he believed the majority of j bis fellow - members, were opposed to ; the monopolisation of the land by squat- , ters. The fourth accusation w&s that ! the Reform Association was formed to put Major Atkinson and Sir John Hall into power. If he thought for a moment that his Association was doing anything to that end, he would resign his membership that very night. (Applause.) Sir John Hall had been an enemy to Canterbury. (Applause.) He did not believe in applying epithets to public men, but the way Sir John Hall got his estate proved he was not an honest man, and he would not trust him. His conduct in reference to the 10 per cent reduction was indefensible, i He was urged to omit all salaries below £150 from the effect of the ' reduction, but he insisted that all should suffer alike, from the day labourer to the " highest official." The Reform Association certainly did not support Sir John Hall and Major Atkinson. (Applause.) Mr Lawrenson then explained the platform of the Reform Association, and said the difference between it and the Electors' Association was, that the former advocated measures and the latter men, and he was in favour of measures, not men. He elicited marked expressions of disapproval , by the statement of his unfavourable opinion of Sir Julius Yogel though he admired Sir R. Stout, and concluded an eloquent speech by saying that if he had induced any of those present to think over any of the points brought forward, he would feel amply rewarded for his trouble in coming down to address them. (Loud applause.) Mr W. Chrystall said he had only entered into politics during the last three weeks, and was sick of them already. He spoke principally of the want of good men in the House. Sufficient care had not been taken : in selecting representatives. The Govern- : ment was an example of the inconsistency ; of our public men. They were going about < the country contradicting each other and i themselves. He was not there to support ■ the claims of any candidate who was before ( i the constituency, but to explain matters to i

them, so that they could select the best men. He criticised adversely and at some length the finance of both, the Atkinson and the Stout- Vogel Governments, and insisted on the need of returning men who could be trusted to carry out the Government of the Colony economically. The Reform Association did not propose to fix the school age at higher than six, or to reduce the standards below five, so that there was no attempt to tamper with education. He challenged anybody to produce a line that he had written advocating Freetrade for New Zealand ; Freetrade was impossible in New Zealand, but what they wanted was an equitable Tariff. Too much was made of the question of Freetrade v. Protection. Freetrade would not do much good to the country, nor Protection do it much harm. Neither of these was the question of the day. The question was (" What's going to win the Grand National ?" Laughter.) He was glad to sec they had still their animal spirit, although money was scarce. The speakers that evening had came forward to interest the electors in public affairs, so that they might return the best man (" Loughrey." Applause) to look after the business of the country in. the present crisis. (Applause.) Mr E. F. Dombrain, who was enthusiastically greeted, moved — " That while thanking the speakers at this meeting for their addresses, the meeting expresses its confidence in the present Government." (Cheers.)

Mr W. B. Perceval seconded the motion. He would first express his regret that Mr Bruce was refused a hearing the other night. He would distinctly elate that there waß no preconcerted plan to disturb the meeting. (Hear.) He had been deputed to attend the meeting and criticise the measures advocated by Mr Bruce. He went on to express his confidence in the present Governmont — an expression to the contrary by one of -the audience bringing down a storm of cheering. Coming to the speakers of the evening, lie could not make out what their programme was. A speaker on one side of him got up aud spoke for Freetrade ; one on the other side of him got up next and advocated Protection. He would point out that of our seven and a half millions of imports there were only two millions which could not be produced in the Colony. He looked forward to see five millions at least of the rest produced here. The present Government had shown the will to retrench, but had not the power, and it was only by the return of members pledged to support the present Government that retrenchment could be effected. The Atkinson Government had shown no ability to extricate the country from ifcs difficulties. (Cheers.) Mr Fisher and Mr G. Simpson, as working men, spoke strongly in support of the preeont Government, as being the only one which had stood by Canterbury, and bub for whom the' Midland Railway would never have been gained.

Mr R. Clephane, ■whose reception was not of a cordial character, opposed the motion. (Hooting.) He blamed Sir Bobert Stout for breaking up the Liberal Party in New Zealand. ("Ob! oh!") There was a majority against Yogel. This statement caused au uproar, and the meeting refused to heftr Mr Clophane any further.

An unknown politician then stepped upon the platform, but his first audible words being " That mental .juggler, Sir Julius Vogoi," hia eloquence was promptly stopped by hootinsr, and aery of "Three cheers for Yogel " was heartily responded to.

Mr Jameson, amid the uproar, proposed that the question be now put, and The Chairman having obtained silence, asked if any amendment were proposed, and receiving no response, put the* question. There was a vast show of hands for the motion, and about twenty against it. The motion was declared carried, and after the cHeers whicH greeted liis announcement had subsided, three hearty cheers for Mr Loughrey were given. ■

Mr Thomson thanked the meeting for the hearing given to the speakers, and proposed: a vote Df thanks to the Chairman, which elicited more cheers.

Three groans for Mr Eeese terminated the proceedings. ...... .. ....