MR SAUNDERS AT BALING.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume III, Issue 648, 29 May 1882, Page 2

MR SAUNDERS AT BALING.

On Friday evening Mr Saunders met the electors of Wakanui in the ferryhouse, Ealing. On the motion of Mr Tilson, Mr D. Jackson was voted to the chair, and intro* duced Mr Saunders with some reference to his long public career, which he said had always given the fullest satisfaction to those who had entrusted their public interests to him.

Mr Saunders spoke for an hour and a quarter, and answered questions for nearly another hour. Mr McDowell asked why the ton per cent had been restored to the upper civil servants and not to the wages men ?—Mr Saunders said that the real cause no doubt was that the upper civil servants had powerful friends at Court, and the wages men had not, but the present Minister of Public Works had said in reply to a question that the reason was that the upper civil servants had been reduced by a motion of the House, and were restored by the same power ; whilst the wages men were reduced, not by any action of the House, but by the regulations of the departments with which the House" had hot interfered. He had always found every Uovernraent willing enough to discharge or reduce the wages of men, but never to )do either to the upper officers, with whom they came immediately in contact. Mr Briggs asked if Mr Saunders would favor the transfer of the railways to a private company I —Mr Saunders said he thought not, unless there was seme better way to secure the colony in the matter than any he could think of. Mr Tilson asked why the charges on the Canterbury railway a were as high as the Otago lines, which cost twice as mqqh to make and to keep in repair?—Mr iSsWndors said because the Otago element, had always been in the strongest force both in the House of Representatives and in the Government. Mr Horsey asked if Mr Saunders would be in favor of putting on duties to favor colonial industries? —In reply, Mr Saunders went at great length into the question of Free Trade and Protection, pointing out the delusion of Protection, which was especially injurious to farmers and to {arm laborers. The modern history of the world was proving in a most striking manner the injury that Protection did tp any country that adopted it. Mr Horsey asked if Mr Saunders would be in favor of steam direct communication with England ?—Mr Saunders said everyone would of course like to see direct steam communication with England, but he (the speaker) supposed that the real question was how much was it worth while to pay for it ? He did not think with Mr Maoandrew that it was worth while to pay LIOO.OOO a year to take home frozen potatoes, but if a service could be established at a reasonable outlay such as the colony would be willing to contribute, and not merely to borrow, it would be far , more advantageous to the colony than the San Francisco service had ever been or ever would be, Mr Briggs asked if Mr Saunders/ did not think the Dog Tax objectionable ? Mr Saunders said that the Dog Tax and registration were necessary to protect sheep owners, and ha thought it would be a mistake to risk any relaxation of that law.

Mr Briggs : Don’t you think a tax on guns would be better ?—Mr Saunders said that boys under a certain age might very properly be prohibited from using guns, but thought there was a great need for guns to keep down the hares and other vermin that had bean introduced by game preservers. He abhorred anything like Game Laws.

Mr Briggs asked if Mr Saunders did not think that the Education Act went too far or not far enough 1 That it spoiled boys for ploughmen, without fitting them for anything better ?Mr Saunders thought not. The best ploughmen in the world came from the country where The boys were most universally educated, arid Burns was made fit for something beyond ploughing by the meagre education of a village school. There were many circumstances in the colony calculated to make our young people impatient of a life of anything like drudgery, but he thought that universal education would not tend in that direction, but rather to show the true dignity of labor. Mr Briggs asked if Mr Saunders would favor a new loan I —Mr Saunders said he would not. It was quite time that our Governments were taught to live without loans. Mr Richardson’s remarks on this subject (which were now repeated by Mr ivess) were plausible, but were quite delusive. as there was no power to overrule the supreme power of Parliament, or to compell them to spend the loans on any specified works. So long as the Government and Parliament could finger borrowed money, the present extravagance would be maintained, and borrowed money would bo used to keep it up and to close the eyes of the electors to the calamities that must result from such extravagance and from such overwhelming indebtedness. Rather than open the door to such certain evils, ho would complete any necessary or probably profitable public works by treasury bills, and then let the bills bo exchanged in London and transferred to a permanent loan. This was the only way that would prevent the money being made an improper use of, and scrambled for in the House. In reply to farther questions, Mr Saunders said that he did not know what was meant by the Eight-hours Labor Bill. Tf its object was to define definitely that where not otherwise arranged eight hours labor was to bo understood as the length of a day’s labor, there was no harm in it. If it aimed at still further protecting helpless women and children, who were not

free to make their own bargains, and might in some eases suffer from the brutality of heartless or drunken parents or husbands, it would have his full sympathy. But if it was an attempt to interfere with the bargains which adult men should make for the disposal of their own services, it was a senseless interference with the liberty of individuals, a gratuitous insult to the common sense of working men, and a mischievous violation of the first principles of I'heetrade. Mr Ivess’ positive promise that ho would at once reduce the cost of law suits and conveyancing, had no doubt been made in the confidence of blissful ignorance. Neither the one nor the other would ever be effected by him. The ablest and best educated men had made very slow work at it, and no others could hope to achieve anything. Mr Ivess could only be a ninety-sixth part of the House at the utmost ; but as a new, an inexperienced, and an uneducated man, ho would really bo very much less than that. Neither Mr Ivess nor himself had received the

necessary education to undertake work like that, and both the House of Representatives and the Legislative Council were very jealous of being led in such matters by ignorant men. especially when the ignorance was so dense that they were

themselves unconscious of it. Men who openly avowed their ignorance and knew what they could not do, wore much more leniently” treated by’ their superiors in education. There wore too many lawyers in the House, and too many newspaper proprietors too, and the farming interest was not by any means adequately represented.

Mr A. Jackson proposed—“ That having now hoard both candidates, this meet* ing is of opinion that the Wakanui electors b*d better send a steady horse that knows his work, and will do it to Parliament rather than a restive colt that knows nothing of the work, and will very likely jib.”

This was seconded by Mr G. Tilsou. Mr J. Clow asked if that was a vote of ooqlidenoe or a vote of thanks 1