NEW ZEALAND MAGAZINE.

Evening Star, Issue 4021, 15 January 1876, Page 1 (Supplement)

NEW ZEALAND MAGAZINE.

Second Notice. It is, we think, to be regretted that a papa strongly tinged with political bias should have obtained insertion in the pages of a magazine professedly devoted to general literature. A review of the present situation fron a neutral standpoint might have been admissible; but the opinions thereon of gtch an active partisan as Mr Stout etnnot but be regarded as one-sided, and tlerefore out of place in such a periodical. is presence there is ludicrously at variance nth the assurance paraded in the introduciory article that "there will be no attempt to give prominence to the views of either party in the struggles that from time to time interest the public." No candid man can read the essay on "Specialisation in Government " without arriving at the conclusion that very undue prominence has therein been given to the views of the Provincialist party. This is a grave mistake, and one whieh, if repeated, cannot fail to operate disadvantageously to the magazine itself. We desire to avoid everything that savors of hyper«ritieisia ; but we must take a preliminary objection to the very title of Mr Stoat's paper. "Specialisation in Government " is of course a Speneerian phrase, and *o may pass; but a transparent fallacy underlies the. continuation —" Illustrated by the struggle .between Provincialism and Centralism "--and the same fallacy pervades the whole article. By " Centralism " it is no doubt intended to indicate the policy of the General Government and its adherents ; but, inasmuch as its use in this connection places the question at issue in a false,light, »t ought not to have been employed. It may perhaps bo permissible to the newspaper Press, so disparagingly referred to by Mr Stanford, to us« expressions devised of set purpose to. evoke popular disapproval; but something better is expected of a periodical claiming the lofty position aimed at by the * New Zealand Magazine.' The word " Centralism " is, in truth, only

A cunning phrase by -faolionXcaught and •pread. If there be any meaning whatsover attached to it, it implies the concentration of the governing power in some one locality ; and it is precisely with the view of destroying this thing that the anti-Provincial party desire to abolish Provincial institutions. There is no special magic in a name, and it natters little to the country at large whe-

ther power be centralised in Dunedin or in Wellington ; but it is a matter of infinite concern that the public expenditure should be fairly distributed in proportion, as nearly as may be, to the contributions of the population. The object of the Abolitionists is, and ever has been, the extension of local self-government; or, as Mr Stout would put it, the greater specialisation of government. The Provincialists are the non-progressionists' of New Zealand. They would fain keep in their hands the power of dealing with the public purse, and of doling out comparatively insignificant portions of the funds at their command for the construction of works in the interior. This is their real policy, and it is one which, we feel bound to say, they have always consistently pursued. But the proposal of the party to which the reproachful name of " Centralist " has been wrongfully applied, is to allocate to each district its fair share of the public revenue, and to provide for the local expenditure thereof under the control of Boards of Works or Shire Councils, as they have variously been designated. The sub-title of Mr Stout's paper should, therefore, have read thus—"lllustrated by the struggle between Provincialism and Decentralisation" ; and the special pleading wherein he so characteristically indulges would have been as applicable to the argument thus stated, as it is to ' the converse proposition. Nay, more so ; for it will not be difficult to show that the operation of Provincialism has been to discourage the tendency to local self-government which is inherent in all English-speaking peoples. What, for example, can be more prejudicial than that the people should be dependent on the tender mercies of a Government sitting in Dunedin for every bridge and every mile of road ? Yet this is the condition of affairs that has hitherto existed, and which it is now sought to perpetuate. Provincialists ask wherefore they should be compelled to go to Wellington for these things, and the answer is that they are not expected to travel so far afield. On the contrary, it is a vital element in the scheme of Abolition that the power of dealing with all such matters should be vested in local governing bodies, elected by the residents of each County or District. Such bodies would be able to bring to the performance of their functions a larger degree of local knowledge than is possessed by Provincial Councils and Executives, and the detrimental system of log-rolling and political patronage which has so notoriously degraded those institutions must then cease to exist. When, therefore, Mr Stout asserts (p. 84) that " the abolition of the Provinces means a greater centralism than has yet prevailed in New Zealand," he states that which not only is not true, but is absolutely the converse of the truth.

It is interesting, and, were the subject of less importance, it would be amusing to observe the " indirect, crooked." process by which he arrives at his conclusions. He tells us (p. 83) that "in addition to the ab-

sorption of all legislative power the Colonial Parliament must also undertake those administrative functions which Provincial Councils performed." As we have already shown, it is not proposed that the Colonial Parliament should do anything of the kind; and Mr Stout himself seems to have a glimmering perception of the fallacy of this statement, for he immediately proceeds to qualify it thus :—" It is true the cost and management of main roads may be cast on county or shire councils or road boards," By "main roads,' we presume all public works now undertaken by Provincial Governments are intended, and this admission is fatal to his argument. Only, we take leave to observe, the word "cost" is improperly obtruded, because the same funds as are now at the disposal of the Provincial Government for such purposes will hereafter be placed at the disposal of the local governing bodies. "But," continues Mr Stout, "education, gaol management, the founding and maintaining of altruistic institutions—such as hospitals, asylums, &c, must be undertaken by the General Government; and, beyond all, the railways, and all those numerous other works that concern a Province, or what is hereafter to be termed a Provincial District, must also be managed and constructed by the central administration." There is an amazing confusion of ideas in this brief sentence. Is Mr Stout so unversed in these matters as not to know that of the nine hospitals now existing in Otago, eight were founded, and are maintained by voluntary contributions, supplemented by grants-in-aid, and managed entirely (and let us add, very creditably) by Committees the contributors ? Does he not also know that the Benevolent Asylum was founded and is maintained and managed in the same way ? And is he ignorant of the fact that the railways, with the exception of branch-lines, which Shire Councils could much better undertake and manage, have been entirely constructed by the General Government ? There can be no greater evidence of the unsoundness of an argument than the concealment of truth, and of this offence it is impossible to acquit Mr Stout. Even in the matter of education, he knows or ought to know that the resources of the Provinces have proved insufficient to meet the ever-growing demands of the people, and this be it observed is true, not only of Auckland, but also in a lesser degree of this Province of Otago. And with regard to gaols management, it is a patent fact that the present system has long since been recognised as defective, and measures have already been taken, in accordance with the recommendation of the Gaol Commission, to provide a central depot for long-sentence prisoners. After these explanations, what becomes of Mr Stout's labored argument on behalf of the retention of Provincialism ?

Let tts now briefly glance at the other branch of the subject. If we rightly understand Mr Stout, he objects to the legislative power being withdrawn from Provincial Councils. He admits, indeed, that such matters as "Constitution of the Judicature, Customs, Post Offices, Telegraphs, Land Registry, &c," should be dealt with by the General Assembly; but he says that " other things " might well be left J;o the Provinces. We wonder if any, and, if so, how many, of Mr Stout's legal brethren entertain the same opinion. Certainlynone of those whohavebeen compelled to wade through the chaotic wilderness of the Provincial Ordinances will desire that the same facility for minute legislation should be perpetuated. Neither is it regarded as aljoon by a long-suffering public. The man, for instance, who is called upon to pay nine license fees in order that his faithful dog may bear him company through the Colony, or the owner of sheep which aro

forbidden to cross a Provincial boundary line, will not, we imagine, be very intensely appreciative of the advantages supposed to be conferred by our Provincial law-makers. Indeed, the very illustration selected by Mr Stout defeats his own argument. He admits that "the theory of one law regulating the disposal of intoxicating liquors is good ;" but he argues that the attempts of the Assembly, to legislate in this direction have only resulted in failures. He forgets, or neglects to add that the chief cause of these failures is to be found in the clauses which incorporate Provincial Ordinances with the general Act. Sweep away th ose Ordinances anu the Act might be made workable, but so long as there are several distinct bodies legislating on the same subject i\ is not possible for a workable measure to be framed. Wherofore then should that which is admittedly good in theory be rendered oi jw effect in practice through the

meddling of Provinci.il Councils? If it is desirable to give greater expansion to local ideas in this or any other direction why not have one Act for the Colony, and allow the various local governing bodies to decide to what extent it shall be brought into operation within each district ? We are not now discussing the principle of the Licensing Act, but merely controverting the propositions put forth by Mr Stout on the subject, and when he asks why play should be given to local feeling in a Licensing District, and not in a Province, we answer him out of his own mouth—because it is desirable to encourage greater Specialisation in Government..

The theory of Evolution has taken such firm hold upon Mr Stout that he would fain evolve our legislators from political protoplasms. The lload Board election is, he tells us, "the first step" in political life. At this stage the organisation of the elector is inferior : "he sees only the need of road-mak-ing, and possibly surface drainage." Bye-and-bye he may, by careful culture, be developed into a school committeeman, and so be " trained to take an interest in education." He is now in the monad stage, and Inay hope to become an articulate animal, or Provincial Councillor, and by due process, an ascidian, or member of a Provincial Executive. "The ascending scale," we are told, ' is necessary: needed to give play to individual* effort, needed to spur the people to look upon politics as something not foreign to them." (p 91.) All this is exceedingly funny, aud not a little ridiculous. It is almost incredible that such nonsense should have been seriously written by a sensible man, respecting the descendants of a people who have enjoyed the fullest measure of civil and religious liberty for many centuries, and who have sedulously practised the art of selfgovernment since the days of King Alfred. Had it not appeared in a periodical bearing the name of New Zealand on its title-page, we might have supposed it to be an essay on the political culture of untaught aborigines, for whom some such public training would be-necessary. Does Mr Stout really believe that no man is fitted for the work of legislation has not been evolved out of the

condition of road-boarclism ? Some notion of the kind seems to possess him, for he has the surprising temerity to assert that "it has always happened when politics were most localised, the greatest intellectual attainment was seen. When the area is too large, the individual is sunk, and the interest and spur to advancement vanish." Here again we are compelled to ask—" Can anything be more directly contrary to the experience of all ages and of every country ? It it not an acknowledged and indisputable fact that the more extensive the area, the stronger the inducement to intellectual exertion, and the greater is the degree of intellectual attainment arrived at. Great occasions bring forth great men ; but what have parochial or Provincial (the terms are interchangeable) politics ever produced but a succession of small-minded Bumbles? Mr Stout quotes a host of writers on political economy in support of this strange and most untenable proposition, but it is apparent that he has read their works only to misconstrue and misapply them; for sure we are that neither De Tocqueville, nor Carey, nor Mill, nor Lieber contend, that the national life of a country should be subordinated to Provincial feelings and prejudices. But Mr Stout can always and with fatal facility argue on either side of a question. No one knows, better than himself that there is "no plea so tainted and corrupt, but, being seasoned with a gracious voice, obscures the show of evil " ; and it would not at all surprise us to find him discoursing on the beauties of Abolition, perchanco from the Treasury Benches, before the first session of the new Parliament shall have passed away.