Wairarapa Standard Published Tri-weekly, Price 1d. WEDNESDAY, JULY 6, 1887. Smart, but not Satisfactory

Wairarapa Standard, Volume XX, Issue 2089, 6 July 1887, Page 2

Wairarapa Standard Published Tri-weekly, Price Id. WEDNESDAY, JULY 6, 1887. Smart, but not Satisfactory

Mr. Bunny’s address to the doctors of Wwrarapa South, at Carterton, on Monday night, was an agreeable surprise. Judging him only by the newspaper company he keeps; judging him by Mr Hogg’s language in the ‘ Observer ’ and

the ‘ Star;’ and by the personal abuse and religious rancour which have so far been Mr Hogg’s only weapons, we confess that Mr Bunny of our imagination, and the amiable, smiling, generally polite Mr Bunny, as be appeared on the Carterton stage, were two entirely dil'ereut persons. Which is the real Mr Bunny ? 'the one who is so suave, or the one who, through his mouthpiece, Mr Hogg, is so scurrilous P Either Mr Bunny- is tar too good a general to use the weapons of blackguardism face to face with the electors of the Wairarapu, or he is unable to eertrol the idiosyuoracies of his led-eaptaui and henchmen, Mr Hogg P Which is it. we ask ? If he agrees with Mr Hogg, the* he deceives the electors. If ho does liotagree with Mr Hoag's abuse and introduction of religion, he must bo unable to manage his own subordinates, and that promises badly for Mr Bunny's chances, of which we have hoard so much, as a “ Leader.” However, it was with unf ploaBulf that we discovered Mr Bunny could not only speak as a gentleman, but with a good deal of cleverness and considerable readiness, when not beyond Ins political depth; and that he could siw as much fairness to an opponent as hit ;wn very strong desire tobe returned w0n..1 permit. Mr Bunny, like most practised lawyers, thoroughly understands the oratorical arts of appealing to a mixed audience. He handles his subjects with much apparent candor; talks gracefully round a matter, and—lawyer-like—always manages to leave himself a loophole of escape. As the speech of a trained lawyer who had experience as a professional politician, it left nothing to be desired; but as the speech of a statesman it was below par. The great defect of Mr Bunny is lack of earnestness. True, he simulates occasionally earnestness, but the genuine ring is absent, and of this both he and his audience are conscious. He caught several times the laughter and applause of his hearers, but never touched their reason or heartfelt convictions.

Sir Buuuy, however, made a few definite promises. If returned, lie would, lie said, go to the House neither as a Vogel nor an Atkinson man ; but here ho was not tjuito candid. It is an open secret that Sir Robert Stout will if possible, throw Sir Julius over as a colleague, and V r Bunny did not toll us whether he would or would not go as a supporter of Sir .Robert Stout, who, and not Sir Julius Vogel, ostensibly led the bouse last session. Mr Buuuy would like to see “an entirely new team,” and if the electors take him at his word, that would exclude Mr Buuuy himself, who is a very old parliamentary player indeed. One thing at least Mr Bunny was candid and certain about—all taxation should fell upon the wealthy. He may have qualified fills, because his legal instincts teach him the value of Qualification, but this taxation of all who nave acquired property by their industry was the leading plank of his socialistic platform. His candor appeared when he admitted that he had not made money by bis talents and industry, though we presume he has had the same chances to do so as others. Hay, if Mr Bunny bo the great genius which Mr Hogg says he is, Mr Buuuy’s chances must have been infinitely superior to those of others. Mr Buuuy is also certain ■•on another point, which no one will probably dispute with him, viz,, that the poor man’s breakfast table shall not be taxed. On the subject of Protection he was not so certain; b“iug as he i°, a freetrader by educatin'’ and conviction, we could sympathise with his difficulty. However, he would in a general way support local industries. He did not speciiy very definitely which industries and indeed touched upon aud left the subject of Protection as if it were a hot chesnut. Mr Buuuy’s treatment of figures was not happy. Ho of course may have the greatest arithmetical genius, but we coufess his figures seemed so inextricably mixed up that wo will refer to them on another occasion. With rest, d to taxation generally he was in favor of an in. come aud laud tax. Ho was naturally very severe on large landholders. lie would not ouly tax laud, but would tax large holdings to such an extent as would “ break up ” the holders. If a man obtained land some years ago—land then of little value—he would “ break up" that man. He did not say he would confiscate the land; he did uot say he would rob the man of his land. No ! It would hardly have served to have said that opeuly aud honestly, but be would so tax that laud that the owners would be glad to efrop it. It is well electors should uu. derstaud this. Perhaps the mau who owns 500 acres will deem Mr Buuuy’s laud programme excellent—as far as regards the mau who has 5000 acres. But the mau with 500 acres must remember that the mau with 50 acres will thiuk

.'Ueh a programme should apply to him also; aud the large majority of us (among whom is, we believe, Mr Bunny) who have no land at all, will want the 50 acre section broken up too. Mr Bunny’s principal objection to landowners appears to be that •“ these men came poor aud are now rieu, and he alluded, though nut by mime, to landowners who spent their I la■ ■ ,^:imis in London. Men who had ’Jim' ;ui, dirge estates should, Mr Bunny thought , rei an ihem : but how they would retain them with u prohibitive laud tax, he ditl not explain. After seuivly eondemning property holders, he admitted how glad the early settlers Were when anyone came with capital to buy the laud, and, if capital be such a hateful thing, Mr Bunny might explain how tNcw Zealand would, have got along without it. Though’ reprobating men who had bought large eet“T oa tie “ cand.or ” again cropped up when he admitteu that “ any of us would have done the same thing.” In his laud confiscation programme Mr Bunny said nothing about improvements, so we cau only surmise this thorough going Socialist aud Anarchist would seize improvements and all. As ro ;ards income duty those with iutomes under £l5O should go free. He desired population and small settlements. ‘••lndia. 'Up borrowing and judicious sj . piling i' an admirably elastic phrase which means just nothing, aud as to Mr Bunny’s figures wo will, as before stated, handle them anon, He was not opposed

to, nor much in favor of, our mil. wiiy administration, but considered Una tlio cost of carriage of police and prisoners should bo counted as an asset; for. netting that had wo fewer lawyers there would be very few prisoners or police to carry. He was in favor of present system of education, and in the same breath condemned its administration. As regards Native matters he would woo the natives in another place. Els ideas of retrenchment were good as far as they went, and Mr Bunny made a point when he said that the whole of the money thrown away on useless fortifications might have been better spent on roads and bridges. He was severe on members who need their railway passes out of session, though the idea is prevalent that a grateful country, in one manner or another, pays the greater portion of his own travelling expenses. As will be seen by the report, Mr Bunny intends to “ knock on the head ” a large number of things; but if he attempts to reform our liovcrument Departments and Circumlocution Offices generally, we shall be very surprised. He again referred to the largeness of his family, and we must congratulate him (and we do so courteously and heartily) upon the fact that his grandchildren now number “half-a-huu-dred” as against *• about 40, ” in the year 1884. There was, ho stated, plenty of money’ in the country, and all that was necessary was to put the financial affairs in a proper state. Ho omitted to mention how long this money would bo likely to remain in the country after his confiscation scheme was inaugurated. Mr Bunny was particular in insisting upon his freedom to join any party after election. He does not want to bo tied. He wants to look about him when he gets down to the House, vhen of com lie might possibly —just possibly—alter «ome of his opinions, as*he has done before 11 is very irksome for a professional politician to be tied. Altogether, however, we reiterate the was ao’ ver one, Mr Bunny took and liemaiulix. anv amount of latitude and longit tide fit sail about it. Vo faucy, however, that when the electors get away from the glamor of his genial presence, rolling-eye. and oratorical graces, they will see that there was not much in the speech. Though the effort of a gentleman and on educated man, it was also that of one who, having little or nothing to loose, was ready for any change that might bring change and benefit to himself. We heai’d two of Mr Bunny's audience standing outside after the meeting, tersely and truly sum the matter up. Said A: “By George ! he can talk, can’t he.” Eeplied B; “ Talk! yes, but it’s talk and nothing else, ” A; “ Well, anyway it helps to pass an evening.”