The Evening Star. MONDAY, AUGUST 16, 1875.

Evening Star, Issue 3893, 16 August 1875, Page 2

The Evening Star. MONDAY, AUGUST 16, 1875.

Whence does our morning contemporary the ‘ Daily Times ’ acquire its information regarding public opinion 1 It is continually revealing something that nobody ever dreamt of until seeing its columns. Its long articles versus abolition, the peril of our Education reserves, and the bias of public opinion read very like clumsy attempts at canard manufacture. With the exception of Mr Stout, and seventy or eighty of his constituents, the gullible people at the Kaikorai, and the ‘ Daily Times,’ the inhabitants ot Dunedin do not appear to be excited on the abolition question, and we think they are very wise not to stultify themselves on the subject. They have frequently pronounced emphatically against Northern sponging, and the tone of the Northern journals points to the spirit that prevails in regard to our unappropriated land fund. The ‘ Daily Times ’ this morning resorts to a most disreputable political subterfuge, and on the weakest of all weak pretences endeavors to excite public feeling against the Bill, on the alleged assumption that, if it passes, our educational reserves will be subject to re-allocation by the Assembly, because, forsooth, they will be vested in the Governor instead of the Superintendent of the Province ! Does the ‘Daily Times’ mean seriously to assert that a mere change of trustee alters the conditions of the trust ? The answer of the least scrupulous must be “ No.” It therefore follows that if the

conditions are not altered, the, General Assembly has just as much power to deal with them now as it would have under the new|jjsystem. It must be plain that if there are no Superintendents, all property that has been vested in them for specific purposes must be vested in some one : it cannot be left without a trustee. It may be advisable, and we think it would be, that education reserves should be vested in the Education Board ; and no doubt when the new arrangements are completed thatfjeourse, or something equivalent, will be taken. We hardly think that the tenth clause of the -Abolition Bill, on which the childish objection of the ‘ Daily Times ’ is based, could have been more explicit in its expressed intention to devote all reserves and endowments to the pur-

poses for which they were voted, We give it verbatim, that our readen may see how flimsy the ground iaToi our contemporary’s objection All lands, tenements, (goods, chattels, moneys, and things in action, and all real and persona! property .whatever, and all rights and|interestf therein, which immediately before the date ol the abolition hereunder of any Province were vested in or belonged to the Superintendent of any Province, as such Superintendent, shall, on the date of the abolition thereof, vest in Her Majesty the Queen. All revenues and moneys, and all securities for Blum moneys which on the date of the abolition of any Piwirce may be the property of or invested on behalf of such Province, shall, on the date of the abolition thereof, vest in Her Majesty the Queen. Provided that if, at the date of the abolition of any Pro vine*, any moneys or revenues of such Province shall have been specially set apart, and shall be available for the purposes of public works within such Province, or any district thereof, such moneys or revenues shall be applicable to such purposes accordingly. Ail contracts existing immediately before the date of the abolition hereunder of any Province, and all actions, suits, proceedings, and things begun and completed at the date of the abolition hereunder of any Province, if by or against the Superintendent of such abolished Province, as such shall belong and attach to and be enforced by andj against Her Majesty the Que*n,

13 nless the ‘ Daily Times ’ can show that Her Majesty or her‘represontative is less worthy to be trusted than the Superintendent, or is more likely to

abuse power, w© sea no reason to believe that the change In that respect will be for the worse. The Bill alters nothing in regard to the Educational Reserves, but the trustee; and the statement that the General Assemblycan deal with them after the abolition in any manner that is nob now open to them is a childish misrepresentation worthy only of some sucking lawyer. It is intended to convey the idea that reserves, which can only be made by the Superintendent under his delegated powers, are safer under the control of a delegate than with a Governor who sanctions his acts. The article can deceive no one who thinks, either as to the objection itself or the contempt in which the ‘Daily Times’ holds public intelligence, as proved by its attempting so transparent a blind.