MR MACASSEY AT THE MASONIC HALL.

Evening Star, Volume VIII, Issue 2388, 26 November 1870, Page 2

MR MACASSEY AT THE MASONIC HALL.

Mr James Macassey, barrister-at-law, who is a candidate for the representation of Dunedin in the General Assembly, explained his views upon matters political at the Masonic Hall last evening. The hall was crowded, and there were many who had to go away, being unable to find even standing room, Mr J. W. Jago was voted to the chair. After some interruption by Mr P. Sherwin, sen., Mr Macasskv, who was received with loud and continued applause, was allowed to proceed with his address. He spoke as follows Mr Chairman and gentle-. men, I have only to ask at your hands the ' same fair play which has just been accorded me by the gentleman presiding. I do not ask from any one at the present moment the smallest sympathy with me in my present position ; but at the same time I think I am fairly entitled to ask th:it no unfair exhibition of disapprobation shall be made against me. (Appluso.) I simply ask a fair hearing ; end if I am not prepared to accept the crucial test which I know all public men arc expected to undergo, then the meeting may pass some resolution which will ctnl me from this platform without a prospect of the slightest success in the ensuing contest. Nnw, if, upon a fair and impartial statement of Ihc purposes which bring me here this evening, you accept the political views which I am about to put for- ’ ward, if also I submit properly and fairly to any searching questions which yon may think proper to put, I think I am fairly entitled to ask from, you that expression of confidence which is usually accorded to candidates for public honors. I have asked yon to meet me this evening to hoar from me explanation of ray political views. You are aware, as stated by the chairman, that this is the first occasion, during a nine years’ residence in Otago, upon which I have aspired to take the slightest part in public affairs. It is true, gentlemen, tj'.at that is an objection in the minds of some, while, on tire other hand, it presents very consider- , able advantages. 1 know that those who have for a long time followed any particular pursuits, or whose minds have been grooved in any particular channel, are apt to }ook at things from a narrow and contracted. point of view, so that they become mentally incapable of dealing with any' new political question in a large and comprehensive manner. I do not pretend fo say that I have this necessary qualification. J yap. not vain enough to suppose that I have; hut 1 have conic forward because 1 ; feci that we have been sadly misrepresented in the General Assembly. (Applause.) Let me ask you, gentlemen, to consider in what way you are represented in the General Assembly. If you turn to the goldfields, you will Hud that one member—-1 refer to Mr G. O’Neill —for two years past has been permanently resident in the Province of Auckland, engaged as chief engineer to the Provincial Government of that Province. You have also a member who has, I think for nearly the same period, been engaged in tin business of stockbroker and mining agent in the same Province, There is a , third gentleman, whose face we see amongst ns again, who I believe has been following his professional calling in Auckland ; and finally we have Mr Vogel, of whom 1 desire to speak with the utmost respect, who lias for nearly the same period been the proprietor of an Auckland newspaper. Now, gen- •

tlcmeu, I say it is utterly impossible that during the past tvvo years, in which all the various interests which constitute the wealth and prosperity of the Colony have undergone very great fluctuations, these members could have been adequately acquainted with the demands of our representative system. (Hear.) 1 therefore urge upon you, whether yon return me or not, to enquire whether it is not the brmndeii duty of us all to secure to the Province more adequate representation than we have hitherto possessed in the General Assembly. But, before leaving the subject upon which I have been just speaking, let me ask you what lias been the conduct of your own representatives ?—I mean those gentlemen with whom we are more intimately connected. As you are aware, Mr Birch has for some time past represented us in the Assembly. Of Mr Reynolds I shall have to speak presently ; 1 have always found him deserving of the respect of those with whom he conies in contact. Before coming to him, I would just refer you to some of the revelations made by Mr Birch upon the occasion of his return from the last session of the Assembly. I will call your attention to the address de'ivcred by him on that occasion, when ho-addressed a crowded meeting of the electors in this building. At the close of bis address be was subjected to a series of questions. I ask you to listen to the answers he gave, which to my mind determine the amount of consideration given by your representative to the large and important interests which he was presumed to represent in the Assembly. Mr Birch was asked a question with reference to the Hundreds Act, and in answer to it he said—“ He supported the Hundreds Regulation Act. He did not see that it effectually shut the people out from the land. -He would tell them honestly that ho knew nothing about the Act.” (Laughter.) While I admire Mr Birch’s candor, is it possible to imagine a more degrading or more disgraceful confession for a public man to make? (bond applause.) To suppose that Mr Birch, entrusted with the interests of this lar re and important constituency, could go to the General Assembly, and blindly vote, without reading it, for a Bill which was the subject of a very considerable of agitation in this Province, is to my mind simply impossible and absurd. You arc aware that this Bill had not oul; been the subject of newspaper agitation, but it was the subject of a special session of the Provincial Council, convened in order to consider it ; therefore, when Mr Birch tells you with all the candor of which a man is capable that he assisted the passing of the Bill without reading it, I ask y-.u was that proper and becoming conduct on the part of a representative ? Let me ask you to consider another answer be gave upon that occasion. Mr Birch stated that “ he believed the financial budget of four millions was a feasible one ; that budget would not have staggered him more had it. been one hundred millions.” (Laughter.) Mr Birch had gone to the Assembly clothed with the weight ami authority which bc’ong to a representative of the City of Dunedin, and thus he expressed himself. I do say that the outside world—the people resident in other parts of the Colony and in other parts of Her Majesty’s dominions —would consider such a representative a positive and downright di-grace. (Applause). I ask you, therefore, as the remedy lies entirely in your hands, to say whether such a man can possibly lay claim to your consideration? [Some delay was here caused by the interruptions of Mr Sherwin.] I do conceive that the past conduct of your representatives has a very strong bearing upon the occasion which brings us here this evening. I appear before you as a candidate for the first time, and I think I may fairly assume that I shall have your present representatives as opponents. It therefore seems to me that you arc fairly entitled to examine into the past conduct of your representatives, in order that you may determine for yourselves whether they can fairly lay claim to your suffrages in the future. I have already stated that when T came to discuss the action of your other rei presentative (Mr Reynolds), 1 should be inclined to treat hjm with more respect. I propose to ask you to gQ with me while 1 review very briefly one or two important Acts passed during the last session. Of course, in appearing before you this evening, 1 have principally to concern myself with the future. If hitherto your representatives have so far betrayed the interests of the Province by their action, it is my boimden duty to bring that consideration before you. 1 do say that in all my reading and experience I never found a representative legislature iu its moribund condition to have passed two measures so full of importance in themselves and so important iu their consequences as the Otago and .Southland Reunion Bill and the financial scheme of the Government. (Hear.) ’ 1 have no hesitation in declaring that these measures should never have received tire sanction ,of the Legislature until the views and wishes of the electors had heen first consulted. (Applause.) Consider for one moment what is the position of the Otago and Southland Reunion BUI. You are all no doubt aware that the session before last a Bill for the union of the two Provinces, which received, if not the sanction, the support of the Government, was introduced into the Assembly by the Superintendent. It was of a permissive character. It passed the Lower House, and was sent to tlie Upper House, where it was thrown out. The Bill, which lately become an Act, and lias rcectvejj the final sanction of the Legislature, is one of an obligatory character. It no longer remains for the electors to consider the justice or expediency of that reunion. Now, gentlemen, 1 want to know in what way can you account for the altered character of the measure ? If it was right and proper or expedient to present this Bill for the'eonsideratinn of the Legislature when it was in a permissive shape, I want to know in what way can you account for the fact that we are bound to a Province in a hopeloss sta,i.o of insolvency, burdened with an enormous debt <y r LSUD, ODD, or nearly so, and yet we have never had pp .opportunity of expressing our opinion up % tfcajt pleasure (Hear.) You are aware that after the Bfll I introduced in the session before last was ; ejected, an election took place in the Province of Southland .upon the question whether the reunion should have eli’eet given to it or not. So far as my memory serves me the election resulted in the return to the Council of twelve members, who announced themselves in favor of reunion, and of six in favor of retaining things iu the position in which they were ; but it is fairly open to question whether, although there was a numerical majority, there was not a decided majority of the electors against the reunion. But even assuming that the electors of the Province of Southland -were favorable to the reunion, I ask you in what way the large body of elec-

tors residing in this Province expressed an opinion favorable to the measure. (Applause. ) The only way in which this Province has at all expressed its opinion has been through the me .limn of the Provincial Council, which has pa-sed a resolution favorable to the scheme ; but if it was considered wise? or just, or necessary, that the electors of Southland should have this question specifically put before them, was it not much more the duty of the Legislature and of our representatives that the same question should be put specifically before the electors of this Province, iu order that they also might express their opinion in a clear and emphatic manner? (Applause.) What has heen the necessary result of this reunion ? We have been burdened with a debt of nearly half a million of money; we are united to a province, the land system of which differs vastly from our own and the local legislation, of which is utterly inconsistent with, and in many instances conflicts with our own local legislation. I do say, before, our representatives tied this Province to an implied assent to that Bill, we should have had the same measure of justice dealt put to us as was dealt out to Southland. Youmust boar in mind that iu the Assembly this reunion was regarded as an excellent bargain for the Province of Southland. You will remember that when the Bill was in the Assembly, Mr Cracroft Wilson, one of the Canterbury members, indulged iu a rather serious joke at the expense of this Province. He likened .Southland to the firodigal son, who after, a course of riotous iving, unites with a buxom widow, we being that widow. When the Bill reached the Legislative Council, the same joke at once suggested itself to the Hon. Mr Gisborne, who was responsible for its passing through that House, and ho elaborated this joke, presenting himself in the attitude of the heavy father upon the hoards of the theatre, and pronounced his blessing upon this most unfortunate union. You will understand that for this scheme I in a very great measure regard Mr Reynolds as responsible. (Applause and laughter). Of course you are aware that this measure was supported by a number of other ,Otago members, so that when your representatives meet you face to face, you are entitled to challenge every public act that is still fairly open to criticism. In regard to the financial measures of the Government, I also think that these measures should have been submitted to the deliberate consideration of the electors. Now Mr Reynolds has hitherto as I understand, declared that not only was he in no way responsible for these measures, but that lie was a thorough and consistent opponent of them. In order that there may be no mistake I will read from the address delivered by Mr Reynolds at the Princess Theatre. Mr Ee3 f nolds said — “He supported the Ministry as a Cabinet, but not their financial policy, to which he was thoroughly opposed. The Government however, had such a large majority that it was impossible to amend the scheme, and moreover he felt that it ought not to be interfered with, so that the Government could not throw the blame upon any one if it failed. I ask your particular attention to the first part of this extract. He supported the Ministry as a Cabinet, but not ns a financial policy, to which he was thoroughly opposed. I have taken the trouble to go through the speeches delivered by Mr Reynolds during tlm course of the session, and I think you will agree with me that the statements which that gentleman made at the Princess Theatre, betray glaring inconsistencies when compared with his own recorded actions and speeches. I ask you for one m meat to listen—l shall take a very short time—to a few words which I shall quote from a speech he made in introducing his scheme for financial separation. Mr Reynolds, after pointing out the unfair allocation of the proposed expenditure on the North and South Islands, said;—“lt may be supposed from my remarks that I am making an onslaught on the Government policy as brought down by the Treasurer ; such, however, is not my intention. I consider the Statement one of the most able, if not the most able, that I have ever heard in this House.” Mr Reynolds, it i s true, proceeds during the course of his speech to qualify ifie statement which he made"; but I ask you—Was this the language of a member strenuously and consistently opposed to the financial measures of the Government? Passing from this little extract from Mr Reynolds’s speech, I come to what is of more importance—viz , his deliberate vote upon the occasion of the discussion upon the Immigration Bill. The oooaeiop when the division took place was, I think, the moving by Mr J. C. Richmond of an amendment upon one of the clauses of the Bill as introduced by the Government. You will bear in mind that when the financial scheme was brought before the House by the Colonial Treasurer, not only the statement itself, but also the drafts of the various Bills by which the Government proposed to secure the legislation to give effect to his policy, were put in the possession of members ; therefore I say if you find Mr Reynolds, or any other representative, deliberately supporting and voting for aiiy of these measures, of necessity you must infer that he supported the policy. It cannot be pleaded that this Bill was a separate or independent measure—it was simply a branch or offshoot of the financial scheme itself- Now I find that upon the division taken upon the 15th clause of the Immigration and Public Works Bill, Mr Reynolds voted with, the Government, assisting them in defeating the opposition to that clause by a considerable majority. I may also point you to a further illustration, to show that if what Mr Reynolds stated be correct that he was throughout the consistent opponent .of the Government scheme, he took a most unfortunate way of showing his opposition. (Hear) You should bear this iu mind: that Mr Reynolds himself came forward at a very early period of the session with a scheme for the financial separation iff the Colony. That scheme was clearly opposed to the financial measures ol the Government.’ The Government proposed iu their grand scheme to unite the descendant element's tlie Colony, to secure for it a great future, nil utLqiy destroy Provincial dis-: affection. Mr Reynolds-' -and 1 ) ( eji,eye with ; all the thorough earnestness a man is capa- j ble of (laughter)—came forward with his scheme of financial separation. He declared, j and I happen to have his declaration in IJanmrd by my side, that he would not withdraw his resolutions, and that he would press them to the vote. You have found since, not only from your own observation, but by Mr Reynolds’s own declaration, that his financial scheme was withdrawn because, as he suggests, he found his support was so lukewarm. I say, regarding Mr Reynolds’s conduct as a roprcßCutativo, it is impossible

you can regard as satisfactory any statement he has now made. It is inconsistent with all his previous acts that ho was a thorough opponent of the Government measures. I thoroughly believe that if Mr Reynolds or any other representative had insisted upon this scheme being withdrawn for a time, and submitted to the deliberation of the electors, the House would almost unanimously have agreed to that proposal. It is very true that upon a suggestion of this kind being made by Mr Reader Wood, the Government elected to treat it as a ministerial question, and therefore Mr Wood’s proposal was withdrawn. But I apprehend there can 4>e very little doubt that if the resolution had been moved by some member in the confidence of the Government, or a supporter of the Government, the Ministry for their own sake, and in order to avoid that disaffection and and dissatisfaction which have arisen in some parts of the Colony, would have been only too glad to have rested upon the honors which they bad won, and have submitted the scheme for the calm consideration and careful deliberation of the electors. But the position in which we are placed is this : we have notit in ourpowernowtoresistthe action taken by our members. I take it this is the effect of their measures becoming law, whatever we may think it will be utterly impossible to attempt to resist their being brought into operation. As a matter of fact one of the measures has already been brought into operation. You are aware that until the payment of Provinces Act was introduced by the Government, the Customs revenue was distributed amongst the provinces in pursuance of a resolution of the House. As part of the Government scheme the Payment to Provinces Act was introduced, and nude it the sum of 40s per head capitation allowance is paid to each province, that allowance diminishing from time to time until it reaches the minimum of 30s. That Act has been already brought into operation, therefore yon have to consider not the wisdom and prudence of passing the scheme when first introduced into Parliament, but the power and ability of the people at large to resist it. I notice that the Provincial Council has had this scheme under its consideration. and it I judge the tone of the Council aright, it seems to me that a considerable section of the Council is not only opposed to the Colonial scheme but disposed to resist it as far as practicable. It seems to me if that course is pursued in it would be a most unhappy and unfortunate one for this Province. (Cheers.) When I read the discussion in the Provincial Council it reminded me of a story I had once heard concerning Sydney ■Smith. It was this : he was talking to an Irish priest about a proposal to endow a Roman Catholic Church in Ireland. The priest replied with considerable indignation, “Tut, I would not touch the dirty Saxon money.” Sydney Smith said, “ But, look here, supposing yon received a letter from the Government authorising you in future to receive LIOO a year, payable in advance; and that there was a bank in a neighbouring town where tbe money could be drawn in advahee, and that there was some good object to aid. do you mean to say you would not at once go to the bank ixx the neighbouring town, and not only draw a quarter in advance, but the whole year in advance?” and so I would sav in regard to this scheme now that these lar< o measures arc passed, and now that a lar; o sum of money is to be obtained, if it can he obtained, and it is placed in the power of tie neighboring Province, more especially the needy Provinces to dip their hands into the Colonial purse, is it possible this Province will abstain from following that example. I say that ip self defence, whatevef may bo your opinion, if these treasures were brought before you, not as the laws of the land, buj; as prospective measures, to he submitted to the Legislature, you are bound to resort to the same cause which has been "adopted by the neighboring Provinces. The credit of the Colony is pledged to these loans, and if obtained, we shall all have to be responsible for their payment; it therefore seetfas to me to follow as a- necessity, that in self defence, if from no higher motive, wdiether you approve of the Government scheme or not, we must avail ourselves of it. (Applause and dissent, and a voice : “ Not if we know it.”) That is my opinion. I was prepared to find that many of you differ from me, but I take this opportunity of stating that I have not the slightest desire to represent this constituency, unless I carry with me not otlly the opinions and feelings, but the sympathies of those 1 represent. I am not to become your representative by any species of misrepresentation. If you desire me to become your representative, it must be simply and solely on the understanding that you agree in the main with the views which I advocate. I am prepared to find that upon some points there may he a difference of opinion, but 1 say upon the point to which 1 have just referred, I have stated to you my candid and (inn convictions, While 1 say that I tlrnk that the Provinces can avail themselves of tlieGovetumei.t scheme. I also say that it is capable of it might bo considerable amendment. If you turn to the Immigration Bill, and to the bill for the carrying out of the water race scheme you will fail to find anything as to the way in which the loan shall be raff e(| and distributed among the Provinces. Tliis is not so in regard to some other of the measures. In regard to immigration, I would rather sec a Provincial system fhau a Colonial .system of indiscriminate iinnuyif,tiou. (Hear.) To my mind the reason assigned by Mr Stafford in favor of the colonial system is the very strongest reason in favor of the Provincial system. Mr Stafford said when in London a number of y cars ago he found the representative of the Canterbury Province, Mr Fitzgerald, vicing with the representative of the Auckland Province, Mr Kidgway, in their endeavor to secure immigrants for their respective provinces. Mr Fitzgerald told intending emigrants that if they went to Auckland they would be eaten up by the Maories, while Mr Ridgway told them if they wont to Canterbury they would become sheep. I repeat that the relison which Mr Stafford lias assigned in favor of Hic colonial scheme is strongly in favor of the provincial system of imuvgration. A colonial agent acting on behalf of eight or nine different provinces, many of them having different requirements Would act totally regardless of the different requirements of each Provjnce ; whereas'if you for this Province a sepaVati'ageh’t as v/elniye Jhtperth had, one conversant with the people and flip wants of the place, it seems to me you have a fairer and stronger charme of getting men to suit the place than if you left the selection to a Colonial agent. I think if yon have one or two agents acting on behalf of different Provinces it will give rise to a system of proper emulation. If there was only one agent, it seems to me he would be totally indifferent as to the qualifications of the immigrants, whether they were of a suitable class

or not; while if the Province is permitted to retain the Provincial system of immigration, you will have some assurance of receiving the same class of immigrants we have hitherto received. I will now turn to those questions which are more intimately connected with the Colony. I dare say of all the questions that are likely to receive the attention of the Legislature, the question of what arc to be the future relations between England and the Colonics will be by far the most important. You will remember that it is not so very long ago when bands of armed savages were scouring the country in the North, slaughtering men, women, and children in cold blood, we submitted to the Home Government an earnest and humble appeal for its interference ; and what was its response ? The response was that we must protect ourselves. (Laughter.) Later on the Home Government, acting perhaps und r the influence of some caustic articles in the London newspapers, promised to assist ns ; hut what was the nature of that assistance ? It consisted of the endowment of our Bill — first for half a million of money, and latterly for the whole million, upon terras, it may be, which wc cannot possibly accept. Yet Lord Granville had emphatically declared that if ever we .required it, England s last man, her last ship, and last shilling should he at our service. I say out upon such hypocrisy. Should England ever become involved with any great foreign Power—and God forbid that it should—her last man, her last ship, and her last shilling would he required for herself. (Applause and “No.”) But 1 think as I have said. (A Voice: “No.”) At least that is my opinion as an Englishman. If you will turn to some of the recent articles in the London newspapers, more especially the Saturday Review, you will find the position of the land and naval forces of England fully described. You will find that the British army is represented as numbering 400,000 men ; but at home, at the present time, there are not more than 60,000 to 90,000 men available. 1 say such a handful of men against those vast hordes of highly trained and efficient soldiers that such a power ns Prussia can bring into the field would be as nothing ; therefore when you come to enn-ider the danger of possible war in which even now England was situated, it is a question we ought to take home to ourselves to consider whether our relations with the home country are on a satisfactory footing. You are .ware that at the present time wo are not altogether free from the possible danger of a war. There are the Blmnbering Alabama claims in America, and there is no knowing what they might resnlt in ; and there is an alleged infraction of the neutrality laws of which Prussia has recently complained. Therefore, I put it to vou that it is no idle or trifling matter to consider whether in the possible event of war,, we should not endeavor to place our Colony in a more satisfactory positition than it now is. This subject has really deceived consideration iu Victoria, whore a commission was appointed, consisting of Sir Francis Murphy, Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, Mr Gavin Duffy, Mr Fcllowes, and soinc eight or nine members of the Executive Council. The primary object of the Commission was to take into consideration a proposal which had been made for the federation of the Australian Colonics, hut as a cognate subject the Commissioners examined into and reported upon a scheme for securing to the Colonies all the benefits of neutrality in case of the Mother Country being involved in war, I have pot that report at hand, hut it recommended that the Colonies should be empowered to enter into treaties with foreign countries, and it was suggested that ns a natural consequence of' that power, the Colonies would he secured from the dangers and consequences of any war in which the mother country might bo engaged. It was pointed out that this would not be an invidious privilege ; that the lonian Islands, the Lord High Commissioner of which was appointed from England, were absolutely free from all risk of the wars of that country ; that the Hanoverian Electorate, formerly vested in the Sovereign of England, was abo not subjected to the consequences of a war in wlhch Great Britain might engage; and that the Golouies being practically left without the power of defending themselves, mid having po voice in the foreign policy, and no interest in the foreign policies of the Mother country, it was only fair that we should bo secured from the consequences of that policy. Apart from tins, it seems to mo that the Colony ought to possess for itself the power of entering into commercial treaties with foreign countries. It is true that recently the Government' has claimed to exercise (he power of making treaties of this dose ipthu, and that a convention between the Colony and the Government of the United States is under consideration; but I very much question whether such a convention on the part of a colony owning Ihe supremacy of England would be, for .i moment, recognised by the authorities of Dowling street. It was utterly opposed to the traditions of Dowling street that a colony should be permitted to enter into treaties with foreign Powers. Still I <]o feel that as we arc practically left without tlie power of defending ourselves—for England has left ns very much in (hat position—it is only fair that we should secure for ourselves all fjie commercial advantages arising from a ppsiijuii of ' independence (applause). The next question to which 1 shall direct your attention is that of the constitution of the Legislative Council. The Council has been styled by one of its members the silent analogue of the House of Lards. There is not the slightest, analogy between the two august tribunals, beyond the fact that both are noneloetivc. If you come to test the constitution of the Council, I think you will agree that it, fails to satisfy any of the conditions which’ Should characterise a representative legislature (applause). 1 ask you to run over in your minds the names of representatives for this Province ; you will find there are the lion. Dr Buchanan, the bun. Mr Patterson Holmes, the hon. Mr Campbell, the lion. .1. APLeau, (he lion. W. d. Miller, the bon. J. Paterson, the lion. Mr Pillans, and the hou. Cupt. Fraser. I venture to say that when you ciihdiill.v examine the rolls of the House you will find that four-fifths of the members either directly represent; or are closely or intimately associated with the pastoral interest of fho Colopy (hear, hear). I am nqt’going, during tlie course of my candidature, to endeavor to enliat your support by any appeal to class sympathies or class prejudices, but at the same time I know of no conceivable reason why a particular interest should exercise so powerful or paramount an influence in the councils of the country. Let me show you in wind, way such an influence may exercise a most powerful effect Take the case of the Stuart am] Truqutijr Hundreds

Bill. That Bill was introduced in the House of Representatives last session with the object of correcting a mistake of the learned Attor-ney-General’s Under one of the sections of the Otago Waslo Lands Act of 1866 (the Sdrd, I think), in order that the interests of the vunholder may he determined, it was provided that any proclamation of Hundreds should assign a date from which the ("state of the vunholder should cease. Now the proclamation of the Traqiiair and Stuart 'Hundreds did not contain that necessary information, but asdic proclamation was prepared by the Attorney-General, the Provincial Governi ment acted upon it; lands were sold, purchase money paid by innocent parties, the different purchases were, assented to, and a number of men set tled down on the Hundreds in the ordinary course of things. After a, time a dispute arose between the licensees and one of the nmholders; and in order to correct this defect a Bill was introduced by the Superintendent, and, with the support of the Government, passed through the Lower House; but when it, got into the Upper House the members, with one or two dissentients, refused to pass it unless runholders, who were really not affected by it at, all, wore amply compensated. The importance of this consisted in the fact that under the Waste Lands Act of ISG(> only a trilling compensation would be payable to the runholders, while under the Acts of 1839 and 1870, very considerable compensation would, be payable, Therefore, if these Hundreds had to bo declared under the latter Acts, it would follow that instead of the runholders being thrown back on their rights under the Act of 1866, they would become entitled to all the compensation given by the Act of 1839 or 1870. There arc other reasons why the constitution of the Upper House should be regarded as eminently unsatisfactory. In one sense, it is an utterly irresponsible body. Time after time it has rejected Bills after they had received a si .tong support iu the Lower House, You are aware how nearly that very important financial scheme, the Public Debts Act of 1867 was from being thrown out of the Upper House. It also rejected the Loan Bill introduced into the Lower House by the Superintendent during the session before last. The Stuart and Traquair Hundreds Bill, and many other Bills might bo mentioned, of consideiahlc importance to us as a community, were also rejected by this utterly irresponsible body. It is therefore a matter very deserving of consideration whether the constitution of the Upper House should not be radio illy changed. (Applause.) I would not altogether deprive property of its proper weight. I would require that members of the Upper House should have certain property qualifications. I would not have the same qualification as for members of the Lower House, and thus we may prevent members of the Upper House descending into the socialistic degree. On the other hand it may be said that a dead lock might possibly occur ; but it only occurs once in a lifetime, and were it to occur it would be more in consonance with our Constitution than the powerful and tyrannical body that we now have. If the Upper House is intended as a safeguard and check upon careless or hasty legislation, it should be so in fact. I do not think that the dead lock which occurred in Victoria should deter us from insisting upon this very important change in the constitution of the Upper House of Parliament. I think yon will agree with me that the members of the Upper House then showed they could he iust even in the moment of their triumph. Yon will remember the course adopted by the Upper Hon-e was so far approved by the people at home that it ended in the recall of .Sir Charles Darling ; hut when the nows of his death arrived, Mr Fellows, the leader of the Opposition iu the Upper House, magnanimously came forward and, forgetting all past differences, proposed a resolution which received the unanimous support of both Houses. There is another q odion to which I desire to invite your attention. U is the extension of the suffrage. I know that there arc many members of this community who regard manhood or universal suffrage with feelings akin to horror ; hut i. fool myself that it is utterly useless to endeavor to stem the to.rrent of public opinion. (Applause) If public opinion both at Homo and here is decidedly iu favor of an extended franchise, I say by all means lot it be granted. One would suppose wc could scarcely have any higher authority upon this question than Mr Gladstone. In a speech delivered by him in the House of Commons, lie thus advocated universal suffrage : —“ The extension is an extension from a Lit) suffrage to a household suffrage, hut really, virtually, ami in principle, an extension that is unlimited. Whim we have adopted household suffrage, wo have, 1 think, practically adopted the principle that every man who is not disabled in point of age, of crime, of poverty, or through sonic other positive disqualification, is politically competent to exercise the suffrage, and that it is a simple question of time anil convenience when the suffrage is placed in Ids hands.” If that is the opinion of the greatest living man in England, wc would not lie endeavoring too soon to secure that extended franchise. I. ask what distinction is there between the ease of a man of ordiiiary intelligence, having his I.2UU or L3OO in the bank, and a man who has L 5 leasehold qualification? [A Voice : The leasehold qualification never paid him.--Laugh - ter,] The L 5 qualification is practically an absurdity. However, 1 have no hesitation in declaring that L am perfectly prepared to vote for an extension of the franchise, subject to qualification, that is a residence qualification. I argue iu this way i if a man reside in a place for" twelve months, he cannot be altogether a good-for-nothing fellow, therefore"! must say if those who claimed the benefit of the extended franchise, registered their claims or resided for six months within a district prior to the registration of their claims that iu my opinion should be ample qualification. The effect won.d be to seeme a residence of twelve mouths before the franchise could he exercised, and subject to Ibis qualification, 1 am iu favor of the extended franchise. But I am not in favor of the extension of the franchise to our female friends (Applause.) A woman’s proper sphere is her own home, and I should ho very sorry to see any woman aspiring to take a part in the political affairs of the world. There are plenty of avenues, in wltieh they can ijirect their energies, if the sphere of usefulness iij. their own home is not large enough, therefore, alt cough the proposal hail the sanction of the Dremier and other leading men in the House, I cannot declare myself iu its favor. 1 am come to the much agitated question of Separation. Before showing you that absolute separation is an impos-ibility, 1 will shew you in what way my feelings tend. When I turn to the Constitution Act, I find that the Imperial Parliament has allotted to

the General Government and the Provincial Councils the spheres in which they can work, and I for my part, will be no party to any change in the Constitution that will abolish the Provincial system. I shall bo able to show that those who advocate total or financial separation, advocate the abolition of the Provincial system. _ When you consider tint the Provincial Legislature has the appropriation of L'1(H),000 a year, I say before wc part with that let us see that we are to get something better. I am prepared to agree to any scheme that will improve the condition of the Province. I am prepared to admit the Provincial system has defects, but I would not therefore smother it out of existence. One or two of those anomalies I will point out - At present the Superintendent and his Executive are at issue, and this has been the case several times. Under an elective Superintendent these crises must frequently occur. The Superintendent acts in the same way as members of the Legislative act, and is returned in his own programme. He is bound to give effect to the policy he has advocated, but is met by men entertaining different opinions, having the substantial support of a majority iu Council. The diffi ailtyinaybe met in different ways : the Superintendent may be nominated and therefore irresponsible, and he would remit the power to those in whom the Executive functions would be placed. In the next place, as under the New Provinces Act the Superintendent might he returned as a member of the Provincial Council, and elected by the Council from among themselves, he might then be presumed to have the majority of the Conned with him. As a third alternative, you might place in the hands of the Superintendent the power to dissolve the Council and appeal to the country. Either of these methods would prevent such a contingency as has been alluded to. I think some of the pomp and paraphernalia of the Provincial Council might he dispensed with, and that wc might do with fewer numbers. (A Voice : And less talk.) I agree with you : and less talk. Of course, it is declared by those who wish to have this system done away with, that you shall have something in the way of Separation. Many of you know the subject has been frequently agitated during the last nine years. One of the first public meetings that I witnessed after my arrival was held in the Commercial Sale Yards. Messrs Vogel, Reynolds, and Pyke spoke. I recollect it well, for each speaker at the conclusion of his speech quoted poetry. I remember it for another reason. Mr Pyke alluded to the Superintendent as the infinitesimal part of a Government, and Major Richardson was not at all pleased. This shewed the idea of what was considered necessary for the salvation of the country. Members went up and supported separation both with time and money, and therefore, although I did not agree with separation, I found amongst its apostles some of the most earnest men in the community, The subject was agitated from time to time until the end of 1837. In that year came a serious crisis in our affairs when a question brought the General and Provincial Government into collision. From that day I date the downfall of separation. Those now who are sincere provincialists have ceased to he soparatiouists, for it involves a common purse for the Middle Island and a common land fund. (A Voice: Not necessarily.) I do not see how yon can have separation without involving one or more nt’ these important elements. But iu 1867 the Stafford Government came forward with a financial scheme by which the financial liabilities of the Provinces were made a 0 denial charge. That scheme received the ready support of the hitter opponents of the Government —the Superintendent, Mr Vogel, Mr Reynolds, and hv large number of members, and jbcforc it passed, Mr Fit/, herbert said “I have explained the financial bearings of the measure, but its political consequences should not pass unnoticed, ami 1 beg to record my opinion that financial separationhas become impossible. In the face of this de claration some of your members agreed to the scheme. lb appeal's to me, since the adoption of the scheme, .Separation lias become practically impossible, is it for one moment to be imagined the General Government would consent to a modification of the Constitution and form of government by which its own security would he affected. The claims of the public creditor would have a powerful influence on such a question. The separation of the two islands would meet not only with opposition of the Colonial party in the House hut at home. Mr Vogel, who was for many years a most powerful and persistent advocate of Separation, has recently somewhat changed in his ideas, and iu discussing the Colonial Defence Loan Bill said, ---It seemed to him lion, mem hers were beginning to take up a creed which it was not at all certain would he for the advantage of the Middle Island. He scarcely thought it necessary to pursue the subject further, and be could scarcely appeal to a higher authority on the subject than our representative for Dunedin (Mr Reynolds). If he was convinced that total Separation has become practically impossible, I cannot understand what illusion induces him to pursue the chimera further. It is perfectly plain according to Mr Reynolds’s views, as expressed by himself, that he considers insular. Separation next to impossible. Of course Separation is to better the Middle Island, hut if it does so, It docs it. by lessoning the security of the Colony at largo, mid it cannot bo supposed that any such scliemewould be approved by the Legislature or public creditors at home. It practically involves one common purse, and one land fund. We have practically separation now. Wc have our own land fund and the capitation allowance in lieu of a share in the Customs revenue. Therefore before givb’g up the power of appropriating L.’IOtMMIO he wished to know what was to he given in lieu of it. It could not tic supposed the seat of Government would bo in Dunedin, and are you going to submit to its being in Christchurch ? I am content, to allow tilings to remain as they arc. I admit the Provincial system has excrescences, but instead of rooting up a popular system, remove them, but do not destroy the system. There is one question on which you will pxpeefc mo to say something—the land questing. 1 am sorry to svy I cannot gdd much tu what you hr/e already heard, It seems to mo impossible for a person iu my position to advocate anything like abstract views in regard to hind. The regulations regarding it must vary from time to time as settlement extends and population increases, and, therefore, what may be sound practice at onetime may be impracticable at another. There is, however, one point on which 1 may express mv opinion, and ihat is; on the question of deferred payments (cheers), and to that I am heartily opposed. (Laughter, cheers, and cries of no special pleading.) There is no

doubt the system is plausible; but when the question is examined there is very little in it. While I cordially agree in the desirability of promoting settlement and encouraging immigration, you must Iv/ar in mind we owe a duty to (hose who, arc here, and care must Ijo taken not to injure them. Hut if a system of land laws is introduced providing for deferred payments there won id be considerable difficulty in meeting demands on the Government, and of the public creditor, solely because the land revenue, on which you rely, would only bo received in driblets. When so much depends on the land revenue, I do not see how you could adopt a s> stem of defered payments, excepting at great sacrifice of the public interest. Some may ask whether, if I go to the Assembly, I go as a supporter of the present Ministry. I decline at present to pledge myself to support any Ministry. I will support any Ministry if the measures proposed are good ; but 1 claim to go free to exercise my own judgment on every scheme submitted to the House, and therefore [ decline to pledge myself to support the Fox ami Vogel, or any other Ministry. (Cheers.) But I think no Ministers should be removed from office unless we can see our way to patting better men in their places. I think the credit of the Colony is liable to be considerably affected by changes of that sort, and I therefore should be no party to removing a Government from office unless I could see a better to succeed them. There are two points on which I should require satisfactory information of the Government—the one in legat'd to the University, and the second on a question discussed in the Dal/ji Timex at some length—The Telegram question. The offer to amalgamate the Otago with the Colonial University on the part of this Province was most magnanimous, and therefore I think a little more deference might have been paid to the wishes of the people of this place than has been shewn. Yon will remember that the Council of the University comprises a large number of men, several of whom are clergymen—the Revds. Mr Stuart, Dr Burns, and, I believe, Mr Stanford, of Tokomairiro. I must say I felt grieved to learn Mr Stuart’s name—the name of a gentleman so respected throughout the Province—was struck out. I believe there is no man in the Province who takes more earnest interest in the cause of education than he, and therefore the reasons assigned by the Government for excluding that gentleman are, to my mind, highly unsatisfactory. It is true that the Government put forward as the principle in which they noted in the selection of members of the Council, that they determin'd not to nominate clergymen ; but surely some exception might have been in favor of the desires of a Province in which the institute was established, and where it was so largely endowed. 1 am not in a position to explain the Telegram question, but you are aware that the J)aih/ Timex has brought two very serious accusations against the Government. One is, that the publication of telegrams containing important news was postponed delivery to an opposition paper, in order to give priority to their publication in a Government organ ; and the other is that telegrams) sent to the Daily Timex wove appropriated by the Government, and published in the Well ini /ton I mlepemlenl. \ refrain from making observations on tlio.se charges, but I must say if they arc sustained the term of the office of the Ministry would not be worth an hour’s purchase. If there is any point more than another on which the electors should express an opinion, it is with regard to the Suez mails. You arc aware that the sum of L2.’!,0U0 has been voted for the purpose of bringing the European mail via Suez But that subsidy is paid to the Imperial Government only in a spect to its irunfit to Melbourne. There-to-e, when the mail arrives at Melbourne, it in a matter of chance when it reaches Now Zealand. Sometimes, for instance, it is a fortnight after its arrival in Melbourne bebefore it roaches its destination. On the other hand you w ill hear in mind wo have bound ourselves to the San Francisco Mail Service, which has been conducted in a most unsatisfactory manner. 1 believe the feeling of the community is that had they the choice between the San Francisco mail and the Suez, we should adopt the latter. Mr Driver asked Mr Vogel to place Lb/,(JO on the estimates to subsidize the vessels bringing the mail from Melbourne. What lias been done I do not know, but I know some offer was made to the owners of tiie Rangitoto to living the mails direct, which was declined. Ido not think the San Francisco Service can last above a few months. Mr Hall s contract was for LI 5,001), and the Inter provineial Service cost L7OOO or LSOOO more, so that practically as much is paid for the H-n Francisco mail as for that by Suez. I believe we cannot rely on its continuance. Mr Collie wrote saying that lydesy the Colonial Government appropriated LSO.OfiO a, year, the Congress would not vote a subsidy for tlie’mail by that route. Now what has been done? This Colony has voted L 40,000 for the vear, and I believe wJI have to pay L7OOO or LSOOO more for Inter-provincial service. If Mr'Collic was correct in representing that Congress would not vote 300,0.00 dollars, except ou the condition stated, I do, not sec how the service is to be continued. Therefore I say we are bound to consider the Suea Hue as the proper route for communication with Europe, and we ought to indst upon its adoption. One subject, the Bankruptcy Act, is in a very unsatisfactory position, I am not prepared to go the length that a very influential section of the community, including a large number of merchants, would go. They are of opinion that unless the estate of a debtor pays 10s in the L, his certificate of discharge should bo suspended. f do not agree with that. I do not think that any rule can bo laid down by which it is possible to distinguish an honest from a dishonest debtor by the amount of the dividend. One may be honest and pay 2s Gd in the L, while another may he dishonest with 17s Gd. Take a ease of a small tradesman, whose prcuusys may bo burnt. Almost of necessity lie. must call his creditors together, and |if his estate did not realise Ids in the L, although it might ready be go fault of fas own, hi.J certificate vyov.ld be withheld. On the other hand, requiring a dividend of 10s in the £ to he paid, is a stimulant to dishonesty ; for a debtor, finding ho must suspend payment, would be induced to Imy extensively just before stopping, in order to raise the dividend to that amount. If an insolvent’s estate did not realise more than Gs Sd in the f, [ would declare that to be a /</■//, m j'nrie case of improper conduct, and ( would put on him the onus of rebutting tbe, | accusation brought against him ; and if >!:o . estate paid a larger dividend than that, 1 | would leave it open to the creditors to c ine | to Court and show That he had been guilty i of fraud ■ leaving the Court to decide the ■ question. [A Voice ; 10s after paying cost*, j j

The question put showed the absurdity of the position he condemned, for an estate might in the first instance show a fair dividend, but the assets might bo eaten up with costs. There is another suhje t connected with the administration of the laws. Although I do not like using the phrase, in the case to which I am about to allude, the law is in favor of the rich and not for the poor. A case occurred in Otago about two years ago in the Divorce Court, which, after being brought before the Judge here, had to be referred for ultimate decision to the Judges in Wellington, The Judges gave a decree w/-s7, the result of which was, the petitioner had to come before the Court twelve months later before the case could be decided. The effect of that delay put the petitioner to the expense of L2of), and his opponent became insolvent. Sow Judges of the Supreme Court are made the arbiters of life and death in criminal ca°cs, and I do not see why the less responsibility of deciding in the civil contract of marriage should not bo left to their judgment. There is another subject of importance to which attention should be given. The banks in the Colony are required from time to time to make returns shewing their financial position. The same principle has been extended to some joint stock companies ; but there is a large number of companies who carry on business, absorbing perhaps money belonging to a considerable number of individuals, but who are not in any way required to explain their position—l allude chiefly to life insurance companies. It appears to me so long as life insurance is allowed to be in the hands of private companies, it is only fair that the public should know their position from time to time ; and I am in favor of extending the system of making returns to these companies. And further, it will become a question whether they should not be required to invest a portion of their funds in the Colony, in order to give some security to persons holding policies. There is another ijiinsilegal subject that requiring revision, and that is the law of succession to real estate in cases of intestacy. You are aware of the distinction at present subsisting between real and personal estate. If a man dies without a will, his money is distributed in one way and bis land in another. That difference has been abolished in some Colonies, and an attempt, that failed, was made to abolish it here. The sooner that is done the better. I ask you now fairly to consider what 1 have submitted to yon, and to decide as yon think right. For my own part, lam quite willing to retire to private life, and not again to seek to appear on this platform. I have no desire to represent yon in the Assembly unless it is your wish I should do so. If I represent you, it will not be a one-sided bargain ; fur if 1 have to go to Wellington, I will have to make some sacrifice. I shall appreciate the honor of being elected, and I hope you will have no reason to be dissatisfied with your choice. On the motion of Mr Grant, a resolution was passed affirming Mr Macassey to be the best candidate that has appeared as yet.