Wairarapa Standard Published Tri-weekly, Price 1d. MONDAY, JANUARY 26, 1885. The Premier’s Speech at Dunedin.

Wairarapa Standard, Volume XVIII, Issue 1665, 26 January 1885, Page 2

Wairarapa Standard Published Tri-weekly, Price Id. MONDAY, JANUARY 26, 1885. The Premier’s Speech at Dunedin.

The Hon. Mr Stout made a speech to his constituents at Dunedin last Wednesday night. To judge by the re port of it which has been telegraphed, this speech appears hardly worthy of the Premier’s reputation. It is, however, possible that when a full report has been received the speech will wear a better complexion than it at present appears to do. Besides, as Mr Stout explained, he spoke under the heavy disadvantage of havin'? been pleading in the Supremo Court during the whole of the day in question, and was thus tired out both mentally and physically. It is much to bo regretted that on so important an occasion Mr Stout should not have been at his best, but the special circumstances of his position will, in some measure, account for the weakness and imperfections of his speech. In the review of the chief events of last session Mr Stout of course repeated an old story. He explained that finding it impossible to form a Liberal Government, he had been obliged to be content with a coalition one. This accounts, to a certain ex - tent, for the present alliance of an advanced liberal like Mr Stout with a conservative like Sir Julius Yogel—but the combination is a forced and unnatural one all the same. Referring to the Legislative Council Mr Stout held “ that a second chamber was unnecessary ; but at the same time they had two Chambers, and the colony was not ripe for one only, therefore it was desirable that the Legislative Council should be made more efficient ; and lie believed one way to make it so would be to elect the members for five or seven years, instead of appointing them for life. If that were done new blood would be got into the Chamber, and he hoped bettor legislation. The majority of the present Council were strongly opposed to the present Government. It was net fair that any Government should be placed in j this position, and the only reforms he could hope to accomplish would be the limiting of their term of office to five or seven years.” Wo entirely agree j 1 with those views. The system of creating “ Lords ” for life and giving them £2OO a year each, is a radically bad one, Their creation for a period of five years would be a belter plan ; but best of all would it be to abolish the Upper House altogether, and some day this will undoubtedly be accomplished. In referring to education, Mr Stout stated that he would try to got technical education introduced into the ptimaryand secondary schools. This would certainly bo a step in the right direction and it is to be hoped that the Premier will succeed in his efforts. Passing over other portions of the speech we come to Mr Stout’s opinion on the question of Local Government. On this subject ho remarked : lie regretted the abolition of Provincialism as a mistake, It might have been adapted to the requirements of the colony, but the present system of Local Government was very impoifeet. What he proposed was not to cto away with existing institutions, but to take them and utilise them as necessary. He would not dc away with ridings, boroughs, or counties, and he would not have all instit * throughout the colony included m one pattern. The plT mt s - vstem co " ld , no | oossibly continue. As an instance, ovl “ the last loan of L 1,500,000, they found that L 700.000 only wore devoted to railways while upwards of Ld‘2o,ooo were devoted to roads, bridges, &o. The Government could not work efficiently if it Uad to P a ? all that for

ro.uls mul such works. Sine.) the verr 1877 lnu expenditure on roads said hiil-cs had rigec from £BI,OOO to L 328,000 in the year. The finances of the colony could not stand that. The amount spent in that way last year was as large on the whole, as the sum spent in a similar manner by New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, and Western Australia put together. The system had entirely broken down. Another matter that was in a terrible mess was that of hospitals and charitable aid. The remedy for these things must be a large system of grouping of districts. There must be an aggregation of some of the counties together so that they can deal generally on certain subjects. Some might say that this would be a return to Provincialism, but he held that it would not. He gave some details as to the working of the system of aggregation, and added that the Government were now doing the best they could, but that it was impossible for any Central Government to manage the many local concerns they were called on to undertake. Certainly nobody will be able to make much out of the foregoing remarks of the Premier, in the form in which they have been telegraphed. We have always held the view that the abolition of the provinces was a step forced upon Parliament and the then Government of the day. When the land fund was made colonial revenue, the doom of (ho provinces was sealed. There was not enough of money available to enable the Provincial Governments to be carried on. But the colony has not yet obtained anything approaching a satis factory system of local Government in place of destroyed provincial institutions. Nor will this be obtained for years to come. The process of building up a thoroughly good system of local Government must of necessity be a slow and gradual one. Mistakes will be made and their corrections will follow, Jas experience teaches what it is the colony really wants in the shape of local Government. Mr Stout’s ideas on this question appear to be hazy and ill defined. All that can be made out from tbe report of his speech is, that he wants to group some of the existing counties together so that they could deal with matters of general concern. This is very vague indeed. Our view of the case has always been that the numerous small counties should be transformed into a few large counties. The telegraphic report of the speech states “ that Mr Stout gave some details as to the working of the system of aggregation,” but we are left entirely in the dark as to what he actually said on this important question. Altogether, we feel disappointed with Mr Stout’s speech. It covers a great extent of ground, but there is really very little in it that is original in view or important in statement. Perhaps when the full report of the speech comes to hand we may see cause to think better of it.