SATURDAY, JULY 1, 1871.

Wellington Independent, Volume XXVI, Issue 3240, 1 July 1871, Page 2

SATURDAY, JULY 1, 1871.

The opposition journals have of late somewhat abated in their denunciations of the "gambling and profligate policy " of the Government. And well they may ; for they find their gloomy prophesyings have all recoiled upon themselves. If (as we stated in answer to the " Economist" at the time of the gleeful publication of its celebrated article in their columns) capitalists are not only willing, but eager to advance the Government all the money they require for immigration and public works, then a policy which has stood the severest test which its opponents could threaten it with, can no longer be the wild and impracticable scheme which, to propose to "shrewd and cautious capitalists," was to " cover its author with ridicule and shame !"' The success of Mr Yogel in spite of his " appearance," so indecently referred to, has quite dispirited (we had almost said disgusted) them. " The homeless wanderer," unworthy of a seat beside the hon. member for Christchurch, has been treated with respect and deference, not only in democratic America, but in ar.stocratic England, and in both countries has raised the colony he represents to a prestige it never had before. Some of the more inveterate, unable to contradict these facts, attempt a very singular explanation of them —an explanation as absurd, as it is utterly opposed to all their former statements. '• The shrewd and keen business men of America" of a few months ago, who were to laugh at the Postmaster-General's "absurd proposals" are now suddenly "simple" and "sentimental;" and the "cautious capitalists" who we were told "would fathom deeply the Colonial Treasurer's financial schemes," are suddenly declared to be " proverbially reckless !" Risivni teneatis? This is their last shift to keep credit with their readers, and get over awkward facts : but such a miserable attempt must only recoil on themselves, for it amounts in effect to saying this, " the hobgoblins we conjured up before you a few months ngo, never existed in fact ; we wish you to forget all we then told you about them, for we are now speaking the truth." The inauguration of the policy by the Minister of "Works was also threatened with 88 many insurmountable difficulties as the raising of the means for carrying it into effect. By some, it was contended that in its administration he would "be carried away" by provinces ; by others, that the provinces would hold aloof from it as " a dangerous and ruinous thing." This double prediction seemed at one time 1 likely to be fulfilled. The strongest province in New Zealand declared against it, and the Superintendent of that province, through a temporary excitement about a land bill, met with a /actious opposition, as he bravely unfurled his banner of colonisation, The

success of his competitor for the Superintendency was joyfully prophesied by Mr Richmond, in Wellington, and the Opposition press throughout the Colony. But at this very time, and when every hostile influence procurable was brought together, aud, in spite of a strong resolution passed by the strongest Provincial Council in the colony against its inception, the Minister of Works carried out the policy indicated by his colleague iv the financial statement— "Let the railways go on," and the same province now " acquiesces" in what it formerly opposed, and asks "the fullest participation" in what it formerly rejected. Every Provincial Council (save one) has asked to be taken in, and there can be no doubt that if the elected head of the province of Canterbury should retard (by his obstinacy in refusing to call his council together) " the promotion of public works and immigration," the course indicated in the financial statement will bo promptly followed by a Government which there very plainly asserts, " We attach far more importance to the progress of colonisation than to the maintenance of any particular form of Government." The " Press" supports Mr Rolleston in opposing the unanimous wish of his Executive — the " Timaru Herald" did so too, but now gives its voice against him. Both journals have most persistently prophesied failure in the administration of the Government policy from its interference by Provincial authorities, but we shall not he surprised to see their fears (or wishes) suddenly disappointed by a dissolution of the Canterbury Council, followed by the election of a Superintendent, who will not rcako himself ridiculous in the eyes of the colony by ignoring the advices and remonstrances of his responsible and constitutional advisers, and, utterly mistaking the genius of representative institutions,, setting his individual opinion against that of all the constituencies of the province by whom he has been elected, and opposing a policy that has become law by the fiat of the supreme legislature. Other opposition journals express no more doubts now as to the colonial administration of the policy, and one might expect that, seeing it has not been administered in the way they dreaded, that they would make a candid, if tardy, acknowledgment to their readers that all their fears on this head had also proved chimeras, and that with regard to its colonial administration, as well as its practicability and general acceptance, their objections were entirely removed. We look in vain, however, through all their files for the slightest acknowledgment. What then, one may well ask, have they to say against it now. The answer is very amusing! This policy they have been abusing so unmercifully is, after all, a good policy, for, what says the " Timaru Herald :" — " Wanting a policy of its own, the Go vemmeut goes about seeking one, and, with excellent wisdom, it seizes upon that which can be safely said to be most concurrent with the views of the people ; and, being a policy propounded by the Government's political enemy, it in a manner disarms parliamentary oppesition." And the " Press," referring to Mr Gisborne's letter about the settlement of immigrants, says that the reservation of land, as directed by Mr Gisborne, " formed no part of the scheme of last session. The Government never said a word about it. . . The Treasurer, in his financial statement, entered into an elaborate explanation and defence of his railway scheme, but as to immigration he gave no details whatever. Nor did any other other speaker from the Ministerial hench supply the deficiency." One is almost tempted to ask — Have the writers of these articles read the Financial Statement ? What does the Treasurer say ? " The two and a-half milLou acres of land I look upon as something more than a margin for contingencies, or for exceptionally heavy works. I regard it, in a great measure, as an aid to immigration in connection with railway construction, and independent of and in addition to the million and a-half sterling over ten years, T propobe, in nne form or another, should be expended on immigration." And again : "It is part of the principle I desire to establish, that the only limit to profitable immi gration is that set by a want of local preparedness to receive the immigrants. From whatever point of view you regard it, whether for the highest social or the narrowest pecuniary view, immigration is a profit to the state, if the immigrants can settle down and support themselves. But it would bo cruel to bring out immigrants, if you do not see the way to their finding tho means of self-support. We therefore say that we will introduce immigrants only to those parts of the colony wldcJi are prepared to receive them. What the nature of the preparation may be, it would be impossible now to define. It might be land for settlement, it might be employment of an ordinary character or in public works ; it might be that facilities for establishing manufactories or aiding special or co-operative settlements were offered." A few lines further on we read : " I believe a great many immigrants may be introduced free, or at a small cost, in connection with public works, or land grants, or cooperative settlements." It would be tedious to make further quotations. The " Press", asks why did the Treasurer not make this part of the scheme rest on the same basis as railway construction, and in the same breath states " in going in for immigration there is no question of more interest or consequence to the colony than this very one — how are we to throw open the land to the people we introduce ?" But alas for our contemporary's inconsistency, no journal has so fiercely deprecated up to the date of this article " any dealing with the land" by the General Government, or any interference with tho land laws of Canterbury! In doing away with the conflict; Pg^aud laws now obtaining in the colony, and substituting one simple law, wo expect the Government will have no more rabid opponent than the " Press "

itself ! But not only did the conflicting land laws prevent any cast-iron measure being passed, but the necessity for the Provincial Government themselves undertaking their own " preparedness " for immigrants was most clearly sot forth by another Minister, who, according to our contemporaries, " never said a word about it." The writer of the Circular, which seems to have provoked their ire, very tersely stated, " Any one having any experience of immigration must know, it would bo impossible for the General Government to introduce immigrants, and settle them in a province, without having the co-operation of the authorities of that province. My honorable colleague, Mr Fox, and Mr Whitaker, were members of a Government who introduced immigrants into Auckland as a General Government scheme, and the result was a failure. After a time they endeavored to get the province to assist them, but it was too late, and the result was most unsatisfactory. It must be remembered, also, that the cost of introducing immigrants may he paid for in land, &c. Co-opera • tive settlements might be made separately, and in conjunction with railways. There is no , doubt that railways and immigration will generally go hand in hand — in fact, they will mutually assist each other, and are to be looked on as the right arm and left arm of the body politic." From these extracts alone it may be seen that Mr Gisborne's immigration circular to Superintendents was carrying out the Government policy in one direction as much as his railway or capitation circular carried it out in another. It was the embodiment of all the speeches — the complement of all the other circulars issued by the Minister of Works. Three | provinces have already altered their land laws in order to throw open the land on easy terms to immigrants, aud two of them, in which immigration had wholly stopped for many years* have got regulations sanctioned by the "Governor, and resumed this important department of colonisation. Canterbury may continue to be instigated by the " Press" to oppose any reduction in the price of her land, and the principle of deferred payments, till the tideof immigration setting in elsewhere, aye. and of emigration from her own settled districts, will show the monstrous folly and impolicy of such a course, if the colonial legislature does not, meanwhile, interfere, and compel her to put herself into a " state of preparedness" for the advancing tide of immigration. The assertion that Mr Gisborne's circular was a borrowing from Mr Stafford's speech at Timaru, is too silly to require any refutation. No one will be more ashamed of it than the hon. gentleman himself. During all the time he held office in what he assured the colony in two or three royal speeches was a time of " peaces," he never indicated any such scheme as that contained in the financial statement, or issued any such circular. Jf s\r Gisborne hud " stolen Mr Stafford's Jlans and ideas," the attention of the polony, instead of being engrossed with immigration and public works, w^Aild be now absorbed in irritating t^troversies about forms of Governmental' in watching, with grief and horroij, a fearful and unavailing expenditure of blood and treasure. Mr Stafford's " plans and ideas" can surely be best ascertained by referring to the time when he was in the most favorable position to expound them, and when he had the fullest ' opportunity of carrying them into offect. This, however, recalls the " wretched past" which Mr Stafford so justly deprecates, but which his friends, by claiming for him the authorship of the policy of his successors, necessarily and injudiciously revive.