AN ELECTION MANIFESTO.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 5460, 11 January 1896, Page 7

AN ELECTION MANIFESTO.

[From the Lyitelton Times.}

Getting in the first blow is, by many people, considered a better guarantee of success in a fight than being upon tho side of truth and justice. The promptitude of Mr Charles Lewis in issuing his address 1 to the electors of Christchurch shows him to be alive to the importance of making an early impression; but it does not necesßarily follow that he underestimates the value of being on the right side. On that point he must be judged by his utterances, which are now in the form of a printed manifesto before the people of this city. We confess, however, that, after a careful poriißal of Mr Lewis's address to the electors, we find considerable difficulty in determining upon which side or politics ho wishes the people to understand him to be. An exhaustive analysis of his very oracular utterances, combined with a survey of surrounding circumstances, leaves no doubt as to his position ; but, so far as appears on the surface of the address itself, the impression conveyed is that Mr Lewis desires to be considered entirely independent of party ties and predilections. We catch an echo of the gentleman who announced :

" I aint a Whig, I aint a Tory ; I'm just a candidate, in short." Under the six headings of Licensingj Education, Land, Labour, Customs and Finance, Mr Lewis givea what he calls a brief outline of his opinions ; but it might bo more properly described as a confession of his lack of definite ideas of his own on political que3tious. To begin with licensing, he pronounces himself satisfied with tho present state of the law, proiesses "no allegiance to either side," and says he will consider proposed changes in the general interest. Is there here the faintest sign of an independent opinion or policy? Similarly, with regard to education, Mr Lewis would simply "let well alone" and resist violent changes. Then, as to Customs tariffs, he recognises that they musb first of all be fiscal, and that they may after that be protective, so long as we are " careful net to destroy revenue or impoverish the consumer ! " A most sapient conclusion, truly ; but one which shows no/ great originality on the candidate's part, and no sign of that " protest " against the Government policy which the electors were led to expect.

It is only when we come to the three remainiug headings of Land, Labour and Finance that we are able, by careful search, to discover a glim-, inering of a policy and an indication of the points wherein Mr Lewis differs from the Government. He dissents from the Government's administration of the Land for Settlements Act, but nGt from the legislation itself. Apparently, he is prepared to grant the soundness of the principle of purchasing land for the use of small settlers ; but his heart bleeds when he sees European holders of large estates forced to part with their properties at a very considerable advance upon the price originally paid for them. He would, 1 therefore, in the case of European owners, confine the working o£ the Act to small estates in the vicinity of towns. If large tracts of land are required for settlement they should be bought from the Maoris. By his tender regard for the large landowners-^---provided they are of the " right colour," racially considered — Mr Lewis simplifies the task of politically classifying him. The proposition to which he has committed himself could only emanate from a Conservative, constitutionally incapable of recognising the right of the people of Canterbury to cultivate the soil without being Bent to the North Island. On the subject o£ labour legislation and its consequences, Mr Lewis obscures his meaning by involved sentences and circumlocutory phrases. His opinion seems to be that our labour laws are mischievous, but his candidature is somehow or other to demonstrate that there is no need for alarm! Soberly, we think the people of Ohristchurch have shown no eymptoms of panic to warrant the application of such a sedative. Coming to the question of finance, the candidate betrays his hostility to the Government by intimating, in roundabout fashion, that he considers the colony to be in a state of financial instability, and that the first remedial step necessary is to "arrive at a knowledge of our real position." Mr Lewis here puts the cart before the horse, and gives away his whole contention. As he is dead certain, like most Conservatives, that the colony's financial condition is unsound, any further investigation would seem to be a work of supererogation. • His anxiety to discover the " real position " of the country's finances carries a nasty insinuation against the Colonial Treasurer, who must be presumed to be concealing the true state of affairs and deceiving the people by misleading Budget statements. To the ordinary Conservative such a view is quite natural, and to such it matters nothing that independent financial authorities in London have praised the lucidity, fulness and straightforwardness of Mr Ward's Budgets ; but we are a little surprised to find such opinions expressed by a gentleman who is commended, and deservedly so, for the " moderation " and " restrained language " of his political address. Our Conservative contemporary in this city has warmly espoused the cause of Mr Charles Lewis, and haa stated various grounds upon which it thinks he would make an excellent representative. With most of these we entirely agree. We rejoice to find natives of New Zealand taking an active part in the country's public affairs, more especially when they have the ability, experience and general fitness of Mr Lewis. If the electors of Christchurch are bent upon returning a Conservative member they could hardly do better than olect Mr Lewis. We hope, however, that they will not support him on the strength of his suitability to represent ''town interests," as the argument under that head is a very Btrained one. We join (with a slight reservation, to cover tho insinuation against tho Colonial Treasurer) in our contemporary's praise oi: tho address of Mr Lewis as being " absolutely devoid of personalities." More, we hail

with delight the admission by a Conservative journal that abstention from offensive personalities ought to be esteemed a political virtue. Several Conservative journals which we could name would be much improved in tone and enhanced in usefulness if they restrained their vituperative powers, and refrained from violent an A offensive personalities. We hope that pur contemporary's commendation of Mr Lewis's moderation of language is a pledge that it intends to eschew personalities during tho coming electoral contest, and in its future criticisms of Ministers and their

works