The Evening Star FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1872.

Evening Star, Issue 2808, 16 February 1872, Page 2

The Evening Star FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1872.

The account that Mr Bathgate gave of the ingredients of which the Opposition of last session is compounded was very amusing, but very true. The veader, Mr Stafford, a disappointed man ; his followers, men who opposed for opposition’s sake, without an idea in common. Each seemed bent on achieving position for himself, and went

his own way Hbont.it. Mv Stafford is ■ said to have .had in his mind some scheme similar - to that adopted by the Government in regard to railways. His friends, at the time, insinuated that he had told his plans, and that in their course from ear to oar, they at length reached the Executive, and were adopted by them. It was current enough in ( ' Wellington that “ Yog i:l “ had jumped Stafford’s claim.” We confess to having doubts about this. Mr Stafford’s notions, if he has done justice to them in his speeches, are not so comprehensive as those which have moved the Government. He has always had a leaning to the class who for so many years mismanaged New Zealand’s -affairs. The clique is now happily broken up, and it is considered by the best informed that it is very unlikely he can again form a party capable of making head against the progressive measures initiated by the present Government. The absence of any common ground of opposition was very ' apparent when the details of motions determined on by the “caucus” of fifteen were discussed in. the House. Their speeches were full of fiery denunciations of the extravagance of the Government, their reckless borrowings, their expensive mail services, their railway contracts. But they were scarcely more reliable than busting speeches. When their general statements were analysed, most of them proved untenable. One thought so and so on such a subject, and another thus on a second, and so on, Mr Creighton, as a damaging shot, moved that the Government reduce the expenditure by L 50,000. This was a very easy motion to speak to. Every one of us could offer excellent advice on such a subject, and declaim against (his useless expense and the other, 'hit when somebody else said “ effect 11 your saving in my way, and cut d.iwu the higher salaries,” like Mr Creighton, we might not be quite so enthusiastic. We apprehend that in every department of Government savings might be effected without injury to the service, if honorable members were true to the professions made at the hustings. Unfortunately this is seldom the case. There is no scruple on the part of many members, both of the supporters and opponents of Governments, to thrust some personal friend into a position he is not qualified to fill, or to sustain him there when once billeted. And so precarious is the tenure of office of even the strongest Executive, that if honestly bent on reducing the Civil Service to a state of thorough efficiency at the smallest reasonable cost to the community, they at once raise up an opposition that will sooner or later unseat them. Mr Stafford once tried his hand at reduction of expenditure. He did not go wisely about his work : iu fact had he been wise, at that time lie would not have attempted so rash an experiment. Some may say he began at the wrong end, and that instead of cutting down the Colonial Defence Force, ho should have abolished useless oflices, and cut down the larger salaries. But the occupiers of such offices carry too heavy metal to give in without a struggle. He had undertaken to retrench, and he did cut down expenses, but with so little judgment that it cost the Colony twelve to eighteen months of the most expensive war that it has yet had to pay for. He knocked off two and paid ten for it. The present Executive hare really saved by bold and judicious outlay of money. They have made the Armed Constabulary thoroughly efficient; they have opened up communication with the interior: they have formed redoubts at passes requiring to be held, and thus they have maintained peace and strengthened the power of the Crown. They propose now to save still further by judicious investments. They are investing in railroads t® open up fresh country for settlement, and in introducing people to settle upon it. Those of our members who calculate, like Mr Reynolds, upon the two or three waggon loads a week travelling three miles an hour along bush roads, with here and there a hamlet to supply with goods, and hence conclude a railway will not pay, take a very short-sighted view of the matter. A railroad in its effects upon the development of a country differs very materially from the old fashioned metalled roach The old road is an expensive affair to make, to maintain, and to work. The old road may render agriculture profitable when it is carried on some twenty miles from a market. But with a railroad the distance is of small moment. Fifty or one hundred miles, or one hundred and fifty miles, is comparatively immaterial. Five or six miles on either side of an old metalled road, and another must be constructed nearly parallel with it. Thus five or six common roads at least must be constructed to convey the same quantity of produce that a railway will transport in a given area: for railways need not be nearer than thirty or forty miles apart. "While, therefore, the usefulness of one common road, so

far as profitably pursuing agriculture is concerned, is confined to an area of about One hundred- square miles, a railway, costing very little more, is equal to the work of two or three thousand square miles or more. We suppose nobody would have found fault or even thought of constructing a metalled road : but a railroad, though a thousand times more useful at less expense, is something terrible to Mr Reynolds.