The Akaroa Mail. TUESDAY, MAY 18.

Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume 4, Issue 395, 18 May 1880, Page 2

The Akaroa Mail. TUESDAY, MAY 18.

The address delivered by Mr Montgomery to his constituents on Thursday last, fully merits the epithet bestowed upon it in the resolution passed at the close of the meeting—viz.," able and exhaustive." This much must certainly be conceded, even by those whose opinions may be diametrically opposed to those expressed by our representative. In criticising the utterances of our member, it must be borne in mind that Mr Montgomery is not speaking merely as member for Akaroa. He is one of a political party, and occupies a leading position in that party. On the various public questions of the day he expresses himself clearly, and utters no uncertain sound. His constituents must therefore, feel in listening to him, that they are called upon to take sides, and either approve, or disapprove, the sentiments expressed by him. For an hour they are lifted out of the petty round of Little Pedlington politics, and made to feel that they are citizens of a great country, a country which will yet take its position among the nations of the earth, and whose future destinies will be largely influenced by the course of action adopted by ourselves, its present denizens.

The opening remarks of Mr Montgomery, referring to matters chiefly personal to himself and his constituency, call for but little comment. They show one thing, however, that the measures adopted by a majority of the electors to defeat the cleverly masked attempt made by a few to induce him practically to " rat" were of great and pleasing significance to him personally, and doubtless were the means of strengthening his hands considerably in his place in the House. The speaker's account of the unworthy strategy practised by the Government in securing a majority —the promises of money grants made in exchange for votes —the celebrated, we might say infamous, compact entered into with the four Auckland members —was very truthful and telling, but referred to matters which are too well known, and, we should hope, too unanimously deprecated, to necessitate any remarks from us on the subject. We now come to the reasons which Mr Montgomery has to s:ive as to why he and those acting with him find themselves arrayed against the present occupants of the Government benches. He says :— "They objected to Mr Whi taker of Piako Swamp notoriety ; they objected to Major Atkinson, on account of his management of finance in 1877, and, before that time, for declining to look the financial difficulty in the face, and for his continual issue of Treasury Bills to tide over that difficulty. They objected to it because many of the principal men in the Ministry had been opposed to Parliamentary reform all their lives. The speaker here read som-e extracts from former speeches of Mr Hall, expressive of what he called good, sound, tory doctrine, and said that though he could respect such a man for his sincerity, he did not think he was the person to be entrusted with the framing of a Reform Bill. Reform measures should be framed and carried by men who had been earnest and enthusiastic in the cause for years, and he, holding that opinion, joined heartily with those who wished to put a real Reform Ministry into power."

We have here a statement of the primary grounds of objection to the present Ministry—that the men themselves were unfit to be trusted with power by any party calling itself Liberal. And in spite of all the cant one may hear about "measures, not men," "fair trial," &c, this is good, sound doctrine. It is just as true now as it ever was that we cannot expect to gather grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles—that any attempt to wash an Ethiopian white will likely be fruitless, and it would be equally unreasonable to expect men who all their lives have professed " good, sound, tory doctrine" to change suddenly into sincere reformers, to hope that others who have been noted in the past for schemes for partitioning the public estate among themselves and their friends will enact liberal land laws, or to expect sound finance from those who have shown themselves adepts at " tinkering" accounts, and postponing the question of facing a difficulty by more or less temporary expedients.

We hold, therefore, that the members of the Liberal party were perfectlyjustified in declining to give their support to a Ministry constituted as the present one is, whatever tempting bait might have been held out to them in the shape of promises of Liberal measures—in fact, they could not help distrusting them, like one of old — et dona ferentes. But Mr Montgomery presents a formidable bill of indictment against the Government, irrespective of the one embracing their past history. Besides coming with bad characters from their former places, they appear to have misbehaved themselves even during the short time the session lasted after their accession to power. The system of giving money to certain districts in return for the votes of their representatives, was carried to a pitch never before heard of. On tin's head Mr Montgomery says: — " But the present Government while dilating on the financial difficulties, did not hesitate to vote money for roads, bridges, &c, all over tne country. They had given £65.000 to Captain Colbeck's district, £50,000 to Taranaki, and £40,000 to Mr Masters' district, and asked the House to allow them to purchase the District Hail ways from their friends. Were these the high-toned prudent men who should have the management oi : their affairs? The whole of the plan of the Government was to give money to get support."

Want of space will not allow us to dwell in detail on the various charges made by our representative against the Ministry, but may say that we agree with him as to the worse than uselessness of that incubus on the Colony—the Native Department. For the evils connected with this hotbed of corruption, however, the present Government are no more to blame than their predecessors, immediate and remote. The fact is that Parliament must step in and sweep the system away with a strong hand. No Government will ever seek its abolition. The Native Minister, whoever he may be, has such enormous sums of public money placed at his disposal, and is so little accountable to the House for their expenditure, that it is expecting too much of human nature to hope that he will voluntarily resign a position involving so much power and patronage-

Mr Montgomery was severe, but not unjustly so, on the farce enacted by Ministers of attempting to divest themselves of the responsibility of governing the country by means of Royal Commissions. He promised that the Opposition would not permit the question of re-distribution of seats to be shirked for another session, though the Government showed a disinclination to tackle it, certain parts of the Colony, which are notoriously over-represented, being their unwavering supporters. We agree with him as to the necessity of removing the settlement, of disputed elections to a calmer and purer atmosphere than the Parliamentary lobbies. At the same time we do not see how it will be possible to prevent the passage of what the speaker calls " whitewashing " Bills, as the Assembly cannot divest itself of its supreme legislative power.

With regard to Mr Montgomery's remarks re the Property Tax, we must reserve consideration of them and of the whole subject for a future issue.