The Feilding Star. TUESDAY, JANUARY 26, 1892.

Feilding Star, Volume XIII, Issue 89, 26 January 1892, Page 2

The Feilding Star. TUESDAY, JANUARY 26, 1892.

Colonial politicians who are only too apt to "speak in haate " should take to heart the lesson given to Sir Thomas Mcllraith, a South Australian representative man, who made certain charges against Mr Lidderdale, the Governor of the Bank of England. The London Times has administered a well-deserved reproof, and designated the charges as foolish and unmannerly, and further, says it is a misfortune Sir Thomas was unable to control his temper. In this connection the Times states that colonial politicians are to blame for the vicious policy of winning labour votes by lavish borrowing. London loanmongers and banks have helped to debauch the colonial conscience by inducing investors to overvalue their securities. If the colonies constantly apply for loans for works not really reproductive they must not look to the London market, and though plenty of money would be offered for legitimate purposes it would not be obtained as cheap as formerly. Treasury Bills, it considers, are justifiable as a temporary expedient, but the issue of them must not assume dangerous dimensions. Our contemporary, however, considers it fortunate that the sydnicates have disappeared. Coroners' juries sometimes form queer notions as to their powers, and the jury in the Pahiatua poisoning case showed they were not exceptions to what may be called the rule. To their verdict they added the following extraordinary rider : " The jury request the coroner to call the attention of the Minister for Justice to the article in the Woodville Examiner of January 2nd, and the article in the New Zealand Times of January 21st, dealing with the poisoning cases here in a manner prejudicial to the interests of justice." This would be amusing did it not form a part of so sad a tragedy. What these wise acres thought the Minister of Justice could do to these two papers, the editors of which wrote with the best intentions, and having the public good at heart, we do not know. We do know, however, that he can do nothing. In the legal acceptation of the term the cases were not sub judice, and were therefore capable of being discussed from any point of view the writers chose to take. It is true that had any person been arrested on suspicion of being the poisoner, delicacy would probably have restrained criticism, but even then there existed no legal obligations to silence. It must be understood that we do not intend to offer excuses for, or to defend our contemporaries ; they are well able to do that themselves. Our contention is that the coroner's jury was guilty of an act of folly which savoured a little of malice. Owing to the general dissatisfaction of the Auckland people with the burdensome taxation inflicted by the present Government, it is quite probable that the whole of the Auckland members will be in Opposition when Parliament meets. Should such be the case the Ballance Ministry is doomed. _____________