SOME OF OTAGO’S LEGISLATORS.

Dunstan Times, Issue 1232, 9 October 1885, Page 3

SOME OF OTAGO’S LEGISLATORS.

If we are to believe our Dowling street contemporary (remarks the Dunedin Herald), there is no lack of political wisdom among our Otago representatives. It has recommended iour possible expectant Ministers out of the ruck, without consideration of the claims of one who has already passed the chair, Mr J. W. Thomson. The quarternion suggested are Mr Scobie Mackenzie, Mr Hislop, Mr Pyke, and Mr Fergus. The expects* tions of Messrs Mackenzie and Pyke may be at once set aside. The ver diet of the public concerning them is —“ Unstable as water : thou shalt not excel.” They are l oth clever in a way, and probably ambitious enough, l>ut they are not of the stuff of which successful Ministers arc made. They both pose as Freetraders, and men of that faith, especially th >se who hold I extreme dogmas as they do, are nob acceptable They may give up as ! portfolio hunters. A pastoral lessee i has ver- litt’e chance of power. The i days of squatters are over. Their in- | terest is opposed to the seitlemcnt of I the countiy, and their views generally ! do not square with those of the people. 1 Mr Hislop may relieve his mind of j the hope of a portfolio. He does not j possess the qualifications. He is not ' popular, and the public are beginning

to think we Lave too many lawyers in the House. Of the four Mr Fergus is the only one who has the chance of a seat on the Treasury benches in the remote future. His strength lies in his consistent conduct. Through evil and goad report he sticks to the Major. He is a fo'lower thoroughly reliable, and you know where to find him. He has sufficient ability and practical experience to make an excellent Minister of Public Works when his time comes.

A correspondent of the Dunedin Star writes : —“ The fhst thing which strik'-s one in the big talking-shop in Wellington is the indifferent position which the Otago members, as a body, hold when compared with the representatives of other provinces. Ido not say anything against any of those worthy gentlemen ; tut it is unquestionably the fact that both socially and mentally they are inferior to the representatives from any other province. In the debaters of the House there are only half a-dozen of our men who stand out at all, and these men are always listened to with patience and respect. If it were not for such men as Messrs Fulton, Barron, Fergus, and Pyke, among’ the old, and Messrs Stewart, Hislop, and Mackenzie among the new, we should lie poor indeed. Mr Fulton speaks but seldom and briefly, but he carries weight, as his honesty and integrity are unimpeachable, and the whole House evidently respects him. Mr Barron is essentially a committee-man, and although for some reason or other not as much liked in the House, is evidently well up in all the Bill. Mr Fergus, when attacking the Government, is very sarcastic, and evidently disturbs the equanimity of the Premier. He is a good speaker, and ready ; bub pitches his voice a little too high. He is, ] however, very popular. Mr Pyke is the wit ot the House, and when he ' speaks (which, by the way, is never till after the 7.30 adjournment), generally cuts clean and neat, and his points tell. When he has done, no one seems to enjoy the points more than VP. himself. He is popular, but does cany as much weight as he should. Mr Stewart, like Mr Barron, is great in Committee, and worries Mr Stout more than anyone. Mr Hislop is a clear and caustic speaker, a little too bitter sometimes, perhaps. A man who can see a point, and is not afraid o! making it though Mr Mackenzie (Scobie) has been written up bv a Uuixedin paper a little bevoud his height. He is a lair elementary speaker, has not a robust constitution, but possesses a disagreeable voice. He has spoken but little, and does not seem to catch the ear of the House. He would like to belong to the Politico-Philosophical School, but has no standing with any section of the House.”