Wellington Independent MONDAY, APRIL 17, 1871.

Wellington Independent, Volume XXVI, Issue 3175, 17 April 1871, Page 2

Wellington Independent MONDAY, APRIL 17, 1871.

" Tim Indki'kndrnt and Mr Fitzherhert lutve each beon attempting selfdestruction, but the last act of the newspaper would be more accurately desenhed by the term homicide. Mr Fitzherbert compares colonial institutions wilh those of the United States. His organ, however, is more explicit. It says that ' in escaping from provincial institutions the refugees would find the same evils in America, only in a more aggravated form.' Mr Finnimore complained that we were over-taxed in New Zealand in consequence of provincial institutions ; but the Independent shows thai our taxation is as nothing

compared with that endured in the United States — ' a country with severe exactions upon everything from the spoon which feeds the baby through all (he incidents and accidents of life to the shovel which fills thegrandfatber'sgrave.' Thus docs the organ and the organist commit mutual destruction. They both claimed much for provincialism because j it was on the American model ; and in answertothc assertion that provincialism grinds us down with taxation, the organ immediately replies that if taxation is great here, it is still greater in the country where the institutions are similar. No argument could be stronger against the system they both defend. When a bass key is touched on the organ it answers a treble; when a treble is touched it responds with a bass, and there is a T3abel-like confusion." Such is the very harmless criticism of the "Wanganui Herald." We are glad, by the way, to note a great improvement in the tone of our contemporary in discussing the Superintendental election. His abuse of Mr Fitzherbert (and that ( is something gained) is less sweeping and more specific, and, what bespeaks a relapse into common sense, he never now utters a word extolling Mr Finnimore's personal fitness for the office. We hope the improvement will cou^ tinue until he agrees with us altogether in thinking that Mr Fitzherbert is infinitely the belter man. We proceed now to notice this paragraph j houdiid " Self-destruction," which is no ' doubt meant to be very funny, but surely was not intended to be vei'y con- j vincing. We object, in the first place, to the assumption that the Independent is the organ of Mr Fitzherbert, if it is thereby implied that we are under any influence, but that of our own conscientious convictions, constraining us to advocate his cause. We have taken a calm and dispassionate view of the state of the province, and of the relative claims of the candidates, and the conclusion we have arrived at, is that Mr Fitzherbert is out of all sight thjs best man for the Superintendence in our present crisis. We have, therefore, advocated his claims on purely public grounds. It may be a very bad stale of things — we will not seek at present to defend it — but if Wellington in the coming Assembly will, alone of all the provinces, have no Superintendent, we are very much afraid we shall get scant justice meted out to us. One of our Wanganui contemporaries, we forgot which, stated lately that our railways are all right — " they are in the schedule passed by the late Parliament." We wish, indeed, it wore so. We wish the extraordinary exertions of Mr Bunny had been notonly almost, but altogether, successful. In tha coining session, as Mr Fitzherbert remarked, there will on this very point be a great battle to fight, and we believe that, as the Superintendent of Wellington, he will be one of our best champions. Many gentlemen from the Middle Island have secured seats by giving a distinct pledge to oppose all railways for Wellington, Taranaki, and Hawke's Bay ; and it will require every exertion on our part, in and out of the House, to get the Assembly to place them this year in the schedule of railways to be begun The financial state of the province, whatever form its future Government may assume, will be a subject of debate in the next Assembly, aud it would be a disgrace and a disaster to the province to have no Superintendent there and then to represent it. The present Ministry, although we believe a fair average in morale, and certainly better in this respect than the last, are not angelic. Like all other ministries, a man who goes co them wilh one vote certain, and others conditional on his success, will be more likely to get his wishes attended to than one who has none. The latter may button-hole in the lobby, but the green-baize door shuts out the most effective advocacy. The Colonial Treasurer (who will have a good deal to do with our financial difficulties) may not caie for Mr Fitzherbert, but he will care for the vote of the member for the Hutt. The Minister of Public Works in advocating the railways in the Northern Province (on which our hopes are fixed) will doubtless rely on professed supporters, but he will not be indifferent as tothe voting and speaking of the Superintendent of Wellington. The time may come when our Assembly will instinctively do i right, without being influenced by speeches or by parties, but we are afraid it is a long way off. To send in Mr Fitzherbert as our Superintendent is to add to our political influence in the House ; and it appears to us " selfdestruction," while other Provinces have Superintendents, round whom their members rally as their natural leader, to fill the office of Superintendent with a gentleman who, evon if he had a seat in the House, has neither the prestige nor ability which go to make a political leader, but having no scut, has no political influence at all. On these grounds only do we advocate the election of Mr Fitzhorbovt, and on these grounds, we feel sure the intelligent electors of Wanganui will support him a on Thursday. Wo must now notice the beautiful dilemma constructed for us." They both claimed much for Provincialism, because it was on the American model ; and in answer to that assertion that provincialism grinds us down with taxation, the organ immediately replies that if taxation is great here, it is still greater in the country where the institutions are similar. No argument could be stronger against the system they both defend." We fail to see how this argument holds. It is a mere petitio principii. This will be better seen if we reduce it to a syllogism. Highly-taxed countries are never pros- [ perous : New Zealand aud America are j highly taxed countries — therefore they are not prosperous. We deny both the major premiss aud the conclusion. Thathighly-taxed nations are not prosperous is an assumption, a single glance at statistics, or one moment's reflection on the history of nations, is sufficient to refuto. We have only to look back on

modern European history,or even to open our eves on what is now before us, and we shall sec nations highly tuxed prospering as much, and a great deal more, than many others taxed very little, or scarcely at all. Nay, we have seen an increase of taxation followed by no diminution of prosperity, and a diminution of taxation attended with no increase of prosperity. The causes of these phenomena we shall discuss on an early opportunity. Meanwhile, we pass on to notice a kindred fallacy to this uttered on the hustings by Mr Fiimimore. " The province of Wellington is bankrupt because it is in debt £90,800 " Now this is manifestly an unfair way of stating the case. Suppose Mr Finnimore had the offer of all the assets of the province if ho would pay off all the liabilities, would he not jump at it? And would he not in a few years be by far the richest man in the South Pacific? We hear so much on all sides about our debts, provincial and colonial, that one would imagine no country could prosper that is in debt. Now a glance at the comparative debts of all countries will dispel this illusion In 1809 Great Britain owed, in round numbers, seven hundred and fifty millious ; France, five hundred and fifty millions; United States, four hundred and fifty millions : yet no one will contend that they were bankrupt, or were not progressing much faster th-m many nations who had smaller debts. The prosperi'y of Great Britain, since she began in 1088 to have a national debt, is a complete refutation of this \cry specious fallacy. Nor the cost of government, as we have lately shown, any indication of the prosperity of a country. A return of the " cost of Government of the European States f-r 1865" is before n«, from which we see that the average contribution of each inhabitant to the revenue is, in Great Britain, £2 6s Id ; Fiance, £2 5s 8d ; Netherlands, £-i 8s 7d, while in Turkey it is 7s Bd, and in Switzerland only Os Id. We have only space to add, in conclu sion, our earnest hope that the people of Wangauui will not be led aw-iy by such misleading articles, and that they will, in the silence of the polling-booth, when all party cries are hushed, allow the still small voice of conscientious convic tion to speak, and vote for the man whom in their hearts they believe to be the best fitted for the office, and thus faithfully discharge theirdu'y to the province, to the colony, and to themselves.