The Evening Star TUESDAY, JULY 15, 1873.

Evening Star, Issue 3245, 15 July 1873, Page 2

The Evening Star TUESDAY, JULY 15, 1873.

The short statement made by Mr Turnbull on Thursday, announcing the reconstruction of the Executive, and marking out the policy projected, will equally satisfy the Province as it did the House. It was perhaps well that the struggle of the old obstructionist party to regain office should be settled before business was proceeded with. Their strength has been tried, and contrary to Mr Reid’s prediction at Mosgiel, they find that a great change has taken place in the constitution of the House. But another revelation has been unfolded. Not only has there been a reduction in the number of Mr Heid’s followers, but there are other aspirants to the leadership of the party. It is always characteristic of young members that they enter upon their legislative duties, believing that they are capable of leading the House. But they must not forget that, although they may feel the utmost confidence in themselves, the country has to learn to place confidence in them. Ingenuity in argument, sophistry and one-sidcdness in debate, have their admirers, but happily they attract only passing attention. The exclamation is often heard respecting one who wields such weapons—“ He is a clever fellow, but I should not like to trust him.” The remark is just. One who resorts to practices of that description creates distrust. The motives that he puts forth are looked upon as blinds intended to conceal something beyond. Who, for instance, can calmly read the record of the debate upon the Maerewhenua land sale, and believe that Mr Reid, Mr Stout, and many who followed in their wake had faith in the style of argument adopted? It has been often remarked, and every day’s experience confirms it, that bodies of men will do what not one of them individually would consent to. But this , usually relates to treatment of subjects on which they are not called upon, publicly, to give reasons for their conduct. ; In most cases, when publicity is necessary, men shrink from expressing opinions, the general adoption of which would strike at the root of commercial morality. It has been for the minority in the Council of Otago to come out boldly, and under the sanction of a legal leader to give utterance to doctrines condemned by every one who has even the lowest perception of right and wrong. What right-minded man could listen without pain to the assertion that because there was no written contract between Mr Reid, on the part of the Government, and Mr Campbell, the Council had a right to repudiate the |

sale? It was perhaps considered merely professional by Mr Stout, who, as we have before observed, seems at all times to be acting rather as a lawyer than as a man. But there are times when this ought to be put off, and when legal acumen should be employed in clearing away those mists which obscure the perception of right and wrong. A legislative body should be above pressing legal quibbles. It is usually considered a final Court of Appeal, to which men apply for redress, even after justice has been denied in a Court of law. It may be perfectly right that a lawyer acting for a client who wishes to be relieved from a bad bargain, should stand upon the letter of the bond and ask where is the evidence compelling him to complete his bargain. Even in such a case, where clear evidence is given of a verbal agreement, common morality condemns the transaction, although it clears the professional adviser. But such arguments are out of place in a legislative assembly. There, strict and uncompromising justice is looked for. What is really disgraceful in an individual, cannot be made honorable by the vote or expression of opinion of numbers. We pass by the weakness which led Mr Reid to fence with the question. It would have been more in accordance with his reputation had he refused to accept the position laid down for him by his party, and owned he asked Mr Campbell to buy the land in order to help in relieving the Province from its financial difficulties. His reputation would have stood higher in eveiy respect had he boldly and straightforwardly said “I, as head of the Executive, under authority of a resolution of this House, asked Mr Campbell to purchase, and I agreed that he should buy so many acres of land, provided it was not auriferous. Every care has been taken to test it: it is shown that the block selected will not pay for working for gold, and therefore I claim, as one of the parties to the bargain, that the sale to Mr Campbell be confirmed.” It is possible that Mr Reid mistook his way through an imperfect perception of the extent to which he was in honor bound to support his friends. But the same excuse cannot be urged in favor of others, who adopted the pernicious cry “Where is the written agreement?” Amid tens of thousands of transactions daily occurring amongst merchants and tradesmen, agreements are made by word and not by letter, and are fulfilled with scrupulous regard to honor and good faith. It has been for Otago, which boasts of its educational institutions, its University, its numerous churches and its moral population, to send men to its Council, who have publicly dared to suggest that a bargain once, struck may be repudiated, because its substance has not been reduced to writing. The majority of the Council has happily sustained its honor, and the Waste Land Board, uninfluenced by the party strife in the Council, has decided that there was a contract which the Province was bound to confirm. Yet, in the face of these evidences, the mere requirements of common honesty, the attempt at repudiation is to be continued, and the Council is to be asked to vote £SO to take the case to the Supreme Court. It is well that the honor of the Province is not in the keeping of a party capable of such a move. Let that be affirmed, and who would venture to treat with the Government for land ? One of the first requisites to settlement is good faith, but what faith can be placed in a Government that one day induces a person to buy land, and the next puts the buyer to the expense of defending his purchase? Let this course be adopted, and the name of Otago will be associated henceforth with repudiation.