The Evening Star THURSDAY, AUGUST 6, 1875.

Evening Star, Issue 3884, 5 August 1875, Page 2

The Evening Star THURSDAY, AUGUST 6, 1875.

At length an Opposition party has been organised in the House of Representatives, and they have declared their intention of impeding Provincial Abolition by every means that Parliamentary practice permits. In other words, however large the majority in its favor, the minority will factiously delay passing the measure. No doubt there are occasions when so extreme a course is justifiable, but they are very rare. The groundwork of the Opposition is of the flimsiest character. It is not based upon sound objections to the measures proposed, but on the theory of non-approval by the people. So far as the Provinces of Otago and Canterbury are concerned, if the measures are to pass, the sooner they become law the better. The reason given by his Honor the Superintendent last session, and during the present year, for withdrawing his support from the General Government was that the land fund would not be secured to the Province. We pointed out years ago that the only way to secui’e it to ourselves was by abolition of the North Island Provinces. They have been craving after a share in the proceeds of our land sales for years, and have most unscrupulously endeavored to obtain it by repudiating the terms of the Compact of 185 G. Much is said about that Compact, but so large a portion of the present population are unacquainted with the terms of it relating to the South Island, that it may be as well to state that at the time the Colony owed the New Zealand Company £200,000, and that, by resolution of the House of Representatives, the Provinces of Nelson, Canterbury, and Otago, on condition of each paying £66,66G 13s. 4d, or one-third of the amount, had their laud revenue made Provincial revenue. It will be seen from this that the Provinces of the North Island bore no part of that burden; and so distasteful was the arrangement to the members of the South Island, that included in the ten members who opposed it were two Cargills and Mr Mac Andrew, Nineteen years have passed away, and that scheme which seemed so burdensome to the Southern Provinces has proved so much to their advantage, that the Northern population repent of what was done, and put in their claim to be partners in our land revenue. It may be doubtful whether so plausible a case could have been made out as to induce the Assembly to pass an Act depriving the Province of it. Many of our best-informed members seemed to deem it probable, and made it a plea for appropriations and endowments that were only excusable on th ground of the probability of such a proceeding. Nor was the apprehension confined to members of our Provincial Council. Sir J. Vogel considered the abolition of Provincialism in the North the only security to the South for the enjoyment of its land fund, and expressly made that security a condition of his proposal last session. The main ground of opposition to Northern Abolition is therefore removed j but since it is now proposed to include the South in the change, a new phase is put upon the matter ; but the danger of spoliation still exists, and will continue so long as the question of Provincialism remains open. lu fact, one object claimed by delay is to place all the Provinces on one footing. When, therefore, it is asked to remit the question to the consideration of the people, one meaning is to reduce all the Provinces to one dead level, to take the land revenue from the wealthy and make them share it with the poor. However specious other plans may be, this is at the bottom of the majority of the Opposition, although we are quite aware that neither Mr Reid nor Mr Maoandbew

shares in the feeling. Their Provincialism is of another complexion: they profess to think it the best form of government. We differ from them. We quite agree that at one time it was a necessity, but we look upon Provincialism as now doing more harm than good. The present Abolition Bill may require modification in some of its details. It will be objected to as leaving matters much as they are, so far as territorial divisions aud local laws are concerned. To our minds this is a great recommendation. Violent aud sudden changes are much to be deprecated. The Bill has the great merit of not unsettling existing arrangements, beyond what was inevitable, and the changes proposed tend to the advantage of many hitherto unjustly-treated districts. If Provincialism is to be abolished—and its fate is irrevocably sealed— the longer the delay the greater the difficulty. As for appealing to the people, they can now express their opinions as fully and effectively as at hustings. Public meetings and petitions are.open to them. Sir George Grey l informs the Auckland people that better terms than are new offered will be proposed: this means worse terms for the South. To delay is to play into Northern hands.