The Evening Star WEDNESDAY, APRIL 20, 1870.

Evening Star, Volume VIII, Issue 2169, 20 April 1870, Page 2

The Evening Star WEDNESDAY, APRIL 20, 1870.

The nomination for candidates that took place yesterday gave Mr Cutten an opportunity of showing what an apt scholar he is, and how readily hje_ accommodates himself to those points which appear to him to be uppermost in the popular mind. As there was some doubt as to his Provincialism, he has taken opportunity to clear that up. It may be that after all the pains he took, some may think more unmistakable language might have been used I than saying that " he held Provincial " views." We would by no means hold a man so tightly bound by what he says at the hustings, as to fetter his free action in the Legislature ; but when ambiguous language is used, it looks like preparation for the future. ! Mr Stafford professes himself a Provincialist. Neither he nor Mr Fitzherbert would allow that they were Centralists, and every word that Mr Cutten used to explain his " Provin- " cial views " could just as easily be urged in favor' of Mr Stafford's County schemes or Road District plans. Part of his advocacy of them rested upon what the ex-premier chose to characterise as their tendency to local self-government It is therefore by no means incompatible with Mr Cutten's present professions that he could support Mr Stafford in his crusade against the Provinces. .but it was not so much what Mr Cutten said that is to be found fault with as that which he left out. There was not that distinct and emphatic determination expressed to endeavor to confine war expenditure to the North Island that there ought to have been. In fact, although he admitted that many parties in the North were interested in the perpetuation of the war, this simple, practicable, and effectual plan of preventing the burden being continued on the South Island was left untouched. With regard to his lame attempt at condemnation of the Hundreds Regulation Bill, it seemed as if he conceived that was a theme in which he would readily find sympathisers in his hearers. We believe he much miscalculated the opinions of the electors. The debate on the subject during the special session of the Provincial Council showed the fallacy of the arguments of the opponents of the Act, and Mr Cutten reproduced these which were most antiquated and -unsound. Mr Cutten, in fact, comes forward basing his pretensions upon past services and ideas rather than upon present fitness. What was there in the Provincial legislators of fourteen years ago to lead their successors to reverence {their dogmas 1 Were they better educated, more experienced, more disinterested 1 Had they prescience of the future to enable them to provide for such contingencies as goldfielcls and goldfields land regulations? Had they even the remotest idea that such vast and complicated interests as have grown up during that period would ever require the consideration of the Provincial Council 1 We are not doing them injustice in saying that the views of most of them when at | Home never went beyond a ploughed field or a cabbage garden that jurisprudence except in its rudest form never entered their heads—that they had never troubled themselves to think about squatting leases and sheep runs, and that when they landed in Otago it was with the crudest notions of colonies and colonisation. Yet, with full knowledge of these facts, the opinions of what are termed by themselves the " settlers " were gravely referred to by speakers in the Provincial Council as if they were sacred laws handed down from generations long buried, and are referred to by Mr Cutten nearly in the same spirit. Mr Cutten is placed in a droll position by the Daily Times. A few days ago he was held up as a model of educational fitness for the Assembly, and contrasted on this ground with the members who represent Otago in the Assembly. With the exception of one, all those members voted for the Hundreds Regulation Bill, and had he been in Wellington he would have voted with them. This morning our contemporary shows the absurdity of its recommendation of Mr Cutten by emphatically condemning those very opinions on which Mr Cutten chiefly relies for support. Our contemporary is right in desiring that Otago shall exercise greater influence than hitherto in the Assembly, but belies his own theory by supporting

a candidate who says that he is opposed to the opinions of the very men with whom lie will be called to act. No house divided against itself can stand. Otago and the Cylony have already suffered enough through the Otago members being divided in opinion and action. Mr Cutten differs from the majority of the members on many points, and is lukewarm on the war poiicy and the ballot : it would therefore be suicidal to elect him.