SIR CRACROFT WILSON AT CHRISTCHURCH.

Globe, Volume I, Issue 91, 15 September 1874, Page 3

SIR CRACROFT WILSON AT CHRISTCHURCH.

Sir Cracroft Wilson, member for Heathcote, in the House of Represen'atives, addressed his constituents at the Oddfellows' Hall last night. There was a large attendance, the hall being well filled. , On the motion of Mr W. Wilson, Mr Murray-Aynsley took the chair. He read the advertisement calling the meeting, and said that he thought it unnecessary to do more than ask those present to give the hon member for the Heathcote a patient hearing. During: the la?t session of the General Assembly there had been resolutions brought forward of great importance, not only to the colony as a whole, but more particularly to us, who had a large interest in the land revenue coming in from day to day. Several of the members of the General A«sembly had issued notices calling public meetings, to hear their side of the question, and now they had got Sir Oracroft Wilson who voted on the side of the Government. It would be of great importance to them to hear this hon gentleman's views on that side, and he was sure that the audience present would give him a fair and quiet hearing. [Cheers.] Sir C. Wilson then came forward and said: Mr Chairman, Gentlemen, and Brother Electors, I thank you most sincerely for your attendance here to-night, and I regret that my ignorance of the usual hour for publicmeetings has caused me to ask you to meet me here at an earlier hour than is usual in Christchurch. That is the reason why you have been detained beyond the hour stated in the advertisement. Had I known when I issued that advertisement what I know now, viz: that no one thought of leaving his dinner or tea table till eight o'clock, of course I would have made my time consort with your convenience, and 1 am willing to bear any amount of odium for the inconvenience my ignorance may have brought upon. you. [Cheers ] I thank you most sincerely for coming to this meeting to night. I think it is only about eleven months ago that I addressed an audience in the Music Hall here, and, consequently, it it will not be necessary for me to do what has been done by other members, namely, to go over a history extending over three years' proceedings of the General Assembly. My communications to you are only eleven months old; and I shall not weary you with old tales and speeches of times gone by. but simply confine myself more particularly to the proceedings of the session just, passed. I believe that a man can very easily weary an audience—that it is very easv for a public man to turn to volumes o f Hansard and read out passages from that book for two hours ; but I am not going to treat you in that way. My address to-night will be the emanations of my own heart, and I trust you will believe me when I say that I am going to tell you what I solemnly believe to be true. Of course, I know well enough—it would be impertinence on my part to affect ignorance—that the great subject, agitating the minds of people for some weeks past, has been the resolutions introduced into the Assembly with regard to the abolition of provincial institutions. 1 beg leave to state not the abolition of the provinces exactly, but the abolition of provincial institutions in the North Island. I think there is a great difference between abolishing the provinces and abolishing provincial institutions. Provincial institutions have, as I think, done their task and done their duty in many provinces. I will go further, and I will saj that, with tbe exception of the provinces of Canterbury and Otago, provincial institutions would better cease to exist throughout New Zealand —[Hear, hear] and I think I can convince you to-night that I think I am right in what I am advancing. Before going further, I may state to you an incident which occurred when first my advertisement calling this meeting together, appeared in the press. I met a facetious gentleman—a friend, who shall be nameless—and who said (very likely alluding to the impending tightness in the money market), " I see you are going to call a meeting of your creditors." [Laughter.] I put up with that speech of his and smiled. Sometimes we smile credulously, and sometimes incredulously. This time, 1 uiubl say, that

my facetious friend was very near the mark. When I returned from England, gentlemen, the Heathcote district was vacant, and you all rallied round me, and without a farthing of expense—except a trifle for advertisements in the papers—although other members incurred in their election, expenses amounting to perhaps £3OO or £4oo—you returned me as your member. So far, gentlemen, I am your debtor—[laughter]—and you, gentlemen, are my creditors. [Renewed laughter.] 1 have always appeared before my constituents once a year, and I now renew that same performance which I annually undertake. I hope I shall bring before you a balance-sheet, which will repay you in full —[laui'hter]— which is more than most. debtors can say in Ohjis!church at least — [renewed laughter]—and that you will grant me my discharge without the interference of any attorney whatever. [Loud laughter] Of course the subject you have most at heart, and have most thought upon, or which, at any rate, has been thrust before you, is those resolutions passed for the purpose of doing away with provincial institutions in the provinces of the North Island. Of cou v se it i» my duty, as your representative, to commence with the siibj -ct you feel tht greater! interest in, and therefore I shall begin with it; but, as those resolutions arose out of a previous debate, and the plant grew in the most extraordinary way, I think I had better begin at the beginning—how the seed was sown, and how the plant was produced, and the tree ripened and bore fruit. I hope you will agree with me, and trust you will think me right in so doing. The Premier introduced a Forests' Bill, and no man who has given the same amount of study to the subject of forestry and the conservation of forests for so long a time as I have done in years both past and present, can be otherwise than perfectly persuaded, as I am, that the Premier was right in that respect. I can give an instance of what occurred close to one of my own properties, in which a forest of black" birch, 300 acres in extent, was burned down in the most reckless manner. It will take 200 years to replace that forest, and taking 150 trees as the average number on each acre, you will easily see what a large amount of valuable timber was then destroyed. Considering that the prosperity of country depends, to a certain extent, upon the rainfall—and we know that the rainfall of a country depends on the existence of forests, especially on the summits of mountains, I say that it was the du';y of the Premier to bring in a Bill of that sort. I should suppose that a Bill for the conservation of forests, in a country where there is not too much rain, would have met with no opposition. But what was the result ? An ac-imonious debate'ook place. I think four Superintendents attacked the Bill tooth and nail. It was said to be a design for the purpose of filching from the provinces two millions,or two millio.is and a half acresof their own land—[hear, hear |—and a plan to get a side-wind possession of land, which members of the General Assembly positively refused to give. If any of you think that the course taken by those hon members was right, then all I can say is this, that I wish you had studied forestry as much as I have. If you had done so, you would come to a different conclusion. The Premier wanted from the produce of tboie forests to take from the provinces the burden as it were, of paying the interest on the cost of the railways that ran through these provinces. It may be said that it was a mere fiction, and that the system proposed could never pay the interest on those railroads. I am not going into that question now, but I have no hesitation in saying that I believe the proposals were made in perfect sincerity. [Hear, hear] The debate became exceeding acrimonious, more so than a quiet and orderly audience in Ohristchurch would hardly credit. I must say that the demeanour of the House of Representatives is everjthing that the most cultivated, polished, and civilised community could desire on all occasions, but there was an acrimony infused into this debate which astouished old members of the House, and especially the tone of the speech of the hon member the Supeiiutendent of Wellington, Mr Fitzherbert. In the course of the debate an extraordinary circumstance occurred. You all know the name of Mr Fox, who has been, I may say, a coadjutor of Mr Fitzherbert's almost since the foundation of the colony, and was driven by the ingratitude displayed by Mr Fitzherbert towards the Premier to get up.and declare solemnly that the Premier was the making of Wellington for the last three years, and he expressed himself as shocked at the line Mr Fitzherbert was taking. You know very well that angry words beget angry words. The debate was continued for some time, and when the Premier rose to reply he certainly gave Mr Fitzherbert back quite as good as he had received from that hon gentleman. He stated in his reply that it was a thankless task. lam not going to give you his exact words, or to read from Hansard, as I have no occasion to refer to printed books. He said if he had got to finance for ungrateful provinces who thwarted every attempt of a grateful Government, it would be better that the provinces were done away with than that such a state of things should last. [Hear, hear.] In this way arose those resolutions. I am not going to deny that in the financial statement the Premier did not say that there were provinces in the most abject distress. He said it was painful to go into their accounts, and he suggested that Nelson should get assistance to the extent of £50,000, and mentioned that Auckland could not move without assistance to the extent of £25.000. [Cheers.J That was his statement before the acrimonious scene of the session commenced, and it is positively true that was the amount of support he wished to give those two provinces to keep them—to use a familiar expression—on their legs for the current year. Whcu institutions have to be supported by money raised hundreds and thousands of miles off, and when the functions of those provinces have not been performed, I think they are now ripe to retire into what we in private life call retiring into the obscurity from which we emerged, and I think it is high time wheu such large sums are wanted from the common purse of the colony to keep them on their legs for the current year, for them to do so. In this way the acrimony of the debate brought the Premier to introduce these lesolutions. [Cheers.] You may tell me this was done in a fit "of pique—all 1 say is that if I see a good thing arise, lam not very careful as to the source of its foundation or origin—[laughter] —and if I know the thing is right, would i not be justiGed in striking while the iron is hot. [Renewed laughter.] It was a split between those who keep up institutions which are past and do no good, and by it we got what sailors would terra a " slant" to get rid of them. Of course I availed myself of that "slant," and if 1 had not

done so I should have been deserving of blame at your hands. As I told you the burden of financing for these bankrupt provinces was made out as a very great burden, and when in addition to that ingratitude, opposition, acrimony, and virulence were added, of course the man turns round and says, I had better get good riddance of them. To quote the words of tha immortal bard who says — " How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is To have a thankless child." Why should our Premier—who, however, is no great friend of mine—be more grateful to a thankless child than Shakspere's hero was. [Laughter.] To that ingratitude and acrimony and virulence, we owe the introduction of these resolutions. It was on the 31st of July that this speech of Mr Fitzherbert was uttered. The Premier replied—l find I must refer to notes for dates as my memory fails me in dates—on the 4th of August to the opponents of the Forests Bill, which was carried without a division on the 6thof August. I am now coming to the commencement of this —I am hardly justified in using what is not a Parliameutary word—"shindy," but I shall ■ . t vse it, but. ca ll it a fiasco. [Laughter.! I wi: ; use an Italian word. On the 6th of August the Premier was smarting under this, and, of course, delighted with the defence of Mr Fox, and he came down and made a ministerial explanation. He is in the habit of doing these things, and sometimes intimates to the Speaker that he wants to say something on the part of the Ministry, and so we get a ministerial explanation now and then He explained that though he would not bring dowu a Bill this session to do away provincial institutions in the North Island, he would bring down resolutions to that effect. Notice was giveu of those resolutions, but I need uoL read them to you. The opponents—those who had opposed the Forests Bill on the plea that it was a paltry pretence for getting hold of the land of certain provinces—[hear]—held a meeting, at which meeting it was reported that they were very irate at this course—that they were going to do all kinds of things, such as raising funds to get obstinate fellows like myself who were in favor of the Forests Bill, ousted at the next election. At that meeting it was proposed by one member—l happen to have some reason for knowing these things, though I did not gain them by bribing female telegraphic operatorsdaughter]—because I got them in a straightforward business way by Mr Macandrew that Mr Reeves, the hon member for Selwyn—l hope he is present—should lead the opposition, and become treasurer of the colony. Of course I cannot vouch for the fact. [A Voice—An honest man too.] I hope we may be all honest men, and yet tell the truth. [Laughter and cheers. | Well, after this meetiug the Premier moved the resolutions, on Thursday, August 13th. Now I am not going to enter on the long account which he gave as to the reasons why he thought the provinces in tie North island should exist no longer. He ivent into a statement extending over three years of the monies he was obliged to advance to keep these provincial institutions on their legs -you will find them at page 575, No 12 of Hansard, 1874. I have abstained from reading you over these accounts. They are enough to shock those who think that funds sboufd not be employed to keep provincial institutions alive in bankrupt provinces. The arguments adduced there are worthy of study. They will enlighten people and make them think that these resolutions should have been passed three years ago. At any rate, that is the conviction my mind has received after reading them, and I recemmend those who believe that the North Island provincial institutions should continue to exist, to study those accounts carefully. As soon as Mr Vogel sat down, after the speech in which he introduced these resolutions, Mr O'Rorke. who was supposed to be Minister of Justice, rose to speak. It has always been very incomprehensible to me how he ever became a Minister—[laughter]—for J. have in vain tried to find, either from his antecedents, or anything connected with him, how he was ever placed on the Ministerial Bench. The only conclusion, to my mind, is that he was a member of an Auckland constituency. They did not know which man to put in from among the members of that Province, and they said, " Oh, let old O'Rorke go in to make up the number." [Laughter.] This is no fiction of mine. If Ministerial seats are not equally divided among the provinces there is sure to be a row. He was put in, 1 suppose, as a sort of buffer, as a make-weight for the members of the province of Auckland. Well, he got up, and made the speech reported in Hansard, and of all the extraordinary proceedings in the Legislative Assembly I think Mr O'Roike's exhibition that day was the most extraordinary, although perhaps I may be wrou". If you remember the debate on the corn "laws in the House of Lords, Lord Brougham, after making a great speech in favor of doing away with the corn laws, went down on his knees in the House and entreated his brother peers to pass the Bill in the most fervent terms ever uttered in a legislative assembly. Well, I may be wrong in saying that Mr O'Rorke's theatrical exhibition that day was the most extraordinary ever witnessed ; at any rate, the most extraordinary that I have ever seen. Not the most extraordinary 1 had ever read of, but next door to it. That a man after being in confidence with his colleagues did not say " I must resign if you insist on introducing these resolutions ;" or say—this came out in the debate—"you cannot expect me to acquiesce in these resolutions." [Cheers.] That a man should sit thus at a Ministerial conference and wait till the resolutions had been introduced, and then from his seat as a Minister turn round and say that he would no longer stand this, that ho shoulddeem himself a traitor to his constituents. [A cheer.J —I thauk ray friend for his applause—and I say this most confidently and boldly ] think a man who could thus serve a chief, oue under whom he had worked so long, doea not deserve to receive the confidence of any constituency in the world. [Cheers.] Talk about his loyalty to his constituency, why did he not. intimate beforehand to the man who had tiusted him, and under whom he had worked, what he intended to do? [Hear, hear.] It ho had said at once, "I cannot go in with you under these oircumsrauces ; I car. not remain a member of the Government as I have been outvoted on these icsolutions ; fill up my place," then I could have understood him. but I cannot understand a man getting up as he did in his place in the House, and making a theatrical display. His faithfulness to his constituents has been alluded to, and the speech which he delivered upon the occasion, has also been very much applauded ; but a very funny scene occurred upon the occaaion which I will tell you, and

in doing so, I may say that I had it from a member of the Upper House, who sat in the gallery apportioned to the Legislative Councillors, which is situate just over the Ministerial Bench, and had therefore a very good opportunity of seeing what occurred. Mr Vogel was speaking, when a messenger of the House came in and handed an envelope to Mr O'Rorke. The envelope was opened. I am told this upon the authority of a gentleman who, as I have said, was present, and in it was the speech, which was, therefore, read and not made. Who wrote the speech or when it was written I know not, but I am assured that what I have told you is a fact. I expect to hear of this that lam now telling you from Auckland, but I don't care, as, thank God, I have never during the whole course of my life been guilty of such a thing as treason to my chief. [Cheers.] Mr O'Rorke immediately after this took up his hat and walked to the cross benches, where he afterwards took up his place. Of course he was not burnt in effigy in Auckland as some of the rest of the members were ; perhaps they may do so to me after what I have said to-night. Well, I have been an advocate for cremation for twenty years. [Laughter.] I don't care what you do to me when I am dead, and so far as now are concerned, you can burn me in effigy, fill it full of Stockholm tar or any other combustibles if you like, but it won't cause me to tell any lies ; it won't make me to desert my chief, the man who has trusted me. [Cheers.] When Mr O'Rorke had finished, Mr Reeves, the member for Selwyn, got up and enacted the part of the leader of the Opposition. Mr Reeves has denied that he enacted the part of a leader, or that he was connected with any party; but there is no doubt that he did do so, and enacted the part of a leader of the Opposition, and did it well ; though as I have said he denied being a leader, or belonging to any party. I hope that in what I have said I have done justice to Mr Reeves. Of course, in face of these resolutions all other business before the House was suspended, and on the 17th August the debate was resumed. On the 20th August the division was taken, and the resolutions were carried by a majority of 25, the ayes being 44 against 16 noes. [Cheers.] Thanks to the kindness of the electors of Christchnrch and rleathcote, I have been for many years a member of the Assembly, but I can safely say that during the whole of those years I never saw a majority obtained on any question larger than 21. I have seen a Ministry turned out. by a majority of one vote ; but I never saw so large a majority as this before. It showed, I think, conclusively, that we had made up our minds that it was quite time to put an end to the farce —the miserable farce, I call having double Executive Governments in the colony. [Cheers.] Will you let me analyse that division list for you, or rather will you go through it with me 1 It has been said that of the sixteen members who voted against the resolution, no less than eleven either held office under Provincial institutions, or were directly interested, or connected with their maintainance. Now let me go back to history, which I learnt amongst other branchesof the educationwhich myfather was enabled to give me. Do we not find there examples of persons similarly circumstanced to these eleven gentlemen ? Do we not find mention of one Demetrius, of whom perhaps you have heard. Demetrius was a silversmith, who lived in Bphesus, who called together the brethren of his craft, and objected to the introduction of Christianity by Paul and those with him, and who abused them for two reasons, one, that they stated that the gods made by Demetrius and his brethren were no gods, and the other that the emoluments which they derived from their trade would cease, and their craft would be in danger of being Bet at naught or cease altogether. I think there are many Demetrius's here, more than a dozen in this year 1874, who are ready to cry out "Great is Diana of the Ephesians." [Cheers.] Let me however come clown to more modern times. Are there not men who have endeavored to prevent the introduction of civil marriage by registrars amongst us? Have they not said, " We warn yon that you Bhould not bring your bride, the lady of your heart, into the equivocal position which a a civil marriage before a registrar will necessarily entail ?" I think thecc are the arguments of some of those men who are not in favor of civil marriages. Then again as to the simplification of titles to land. As a sessions judge of long experience I saw the advantages of the Bill of Mr Torrens—l beg his pardon, Colonel Torrens —which had been introduced into another colony and also into England. In this colony there can be no doubt that there were a number of defects in the titles to land, and I saw what advantages there would be derived in getting Colonel Torrens' Bill into this colony. It had been introduced into Adelaide, and had worked well ; but will you believe it that it was tried to be introduced into Auckland for eight years after it had been in work in Adelaide, and that before it got to Canterbury it was eleven years, so strong was the provincial opposition to an Act which has done so much good to us all. [Cheers] These facts will give you an illustration of the arguments to be encountered by those who say, do away with the provinces and provincial institutions. The objections urged arc that the provinces are not ready for the change, and that it is unconstitutional. Now, as regards the first of these, I say that provincial institutions are by their very nature of a transitory character. Let us look back at old England at the time of the Heptarchy. The Heptarchy consisted of seven provinces, but the England of 1874 would not be what it is if the II |«I:• re*• v had continued to exist. What we have to consider is, when hive these provinces done their work, and when is the time for them to cease. I tell you that the provinces of Otago and Canterbury are the only provinces in which provincial institutions should be allowed to exist. I go further, and say, that the Colonial Government having taken up immigration and public, works, that when the Land Fund is done in these provinces it will be time to consider their abolition. I may offend some of you—it is very possible —but it is my idea, and I have long seen it, that when the provinces have done their work, then is the time that they should be abolished. In the province of Nelson they have sold all their land years ago, and yet they want £50,000 to keep up the farce of double Government, and what is called responsible Government. I am speaking to Englishmen, and 1 say thai you will not suffer this piovince to get £50,000 out of your pockets to keep up this farce. Yet this is stated in Mr Vogel's financial statement. The Provincial Secretary and .Superintendent of Taranaki, tells us that itis time that provincial institutions should cease in his province,

and in the face of this, do you think that we ought to c nsent to keep up this farce. I say, let v>- :tt once say that the provinces h;ive cea&cd ; let us at once set to work to do his, and the colony will then be in a position to advance. [Cheers.] Another objection to these resolutions is that they are unconstitutional; but I look upon this as a perfectly futile one. So soon as anvthing is brought forward which does not exactly suit, the views of some persons, it is immediately said '-Oh! that is unconstitutional." My friend Mr Stafford in the House of Representatives said that 10,000 British soldiers were moved with a stroke of the pen, and I would also remind you that the question of the removal of the seat of Government was decided without appealing to the electors of the colony; not that it is any particular benefit to have to live in Wellington for three months, rather the reverse. Therefore it is that I say, the objection that it is unconstitutional, is so much nonsense. Another objection that is urged against the resolution is, that it is a great surprise to the colony. It is a very great surprise to me—not in the way it is here put—but that the provinces which have been borrowing money and who have no laud, should have been allowed to livti on the colony so long, and it is a surprise to me that they have not been done away with long ago'; that is the surprise. [Hear.] I may tell yon something which, perhaps you do not know, and I do so because T think it right all should be known in this matter. It is currently reported that six miles of iron rails, paid for out of the money of the colony, have been sent to Auckland for the Onehung i line, but that these iron rails went to pay provincial salaries, so that the Superintendent of Auckland, like the ostrich, has lived upon iron. [Cheers.] Well, gentlemen, is it not time that this should cease, for the General Government would never do this ; they would never sell rails to pay their salaries. The Premier, in his financial statement, stated that Auckland was to receive £25,000, and Nelson £50,000. I will not go into the details of the statement, but after such a financial statement as this, can any man of education say that doing away with provincial institu tions has taken him by surprise. When a man finds that it is proposed to pay £50,000 to one. and £25,000 to another, it cau be nosuiprise that it is proposed to stop such an incurs'', on our funds. Do you not remember tlr-t. when the Premier was introducing hit; whsme of 1870 it was urged upon him t . ma!; railways only in those provinces which could afford it: such as Otago and Canterbury. But what did he say, and for which he was lauded by these very men who now profess to be surprised. He said " the poorer the provinces, the more need was there that the colony should make railways for them." But I say that, if a province cannot afford it, don't do it. [ApplKiis,'.J I wish to say that, when the scheme was put forward involving ten millions, I entreated them to be cautious, but only four members went with me ; all the rest went to the other side. It is absurd to talk of surprise in this matter, as many of these men were in favor of giving railways to bankrupt provinces. It is the same in public matters a« in private life, except that in private life one might go over the hill to Lyttelton while bankrupt provinces cannot. It has been said that if we abolish the provinces we. shall lose our land fund, and that is an argument which I know weighs with my friend Mr Nairn, who applauded me just now. [Laughter.] He comes from the Land of Cakes, and knows that two and two make four, but I hope you will listen to me for a moment or two. I have tried to see that the abolition of the provinces necessitates the loss of the land fund, but I cannot see the connection between these two. Do you mean to tell me that if you distribute money locally raised where it is so raised that it matters if it is spent by a municipality or Road Board organisation. To tell me that this land fund is mixed up with provincial institutions is not true, and I tell you now that I fail to see it. The Premier has told us that all land funds shall belong to the locality where they have been raised, and shall be locally expended. But the quondam supporters of the Premier, who now turn round, may say, " Ah, the Premier has said this before several times, buthe is not to be believed." But I tell these gentlemen who now say this, that we cannot but believe the Premier, and I tell them and all their kith and kin that I told them before they were going too fast. They have trusted the Premier too much to say this. They have trusted him again to the extent of four millions. I could not see any use in making objections myself, so I heid my tongue. I think it is Cicero, or some classic author at all events, who says that a man does not become a rogue all at once—that he goes by degrees, and gently into it ; but here we have a most extraordinary thing. They say that he is now become so base that he would deceive the whole colony, and I say that it is a shame that the quondam supporters of the Premier should say this of him. [Cheers.] I have always thought Mr Vogel very rash, and have said so to his face in the House, but I don't believe him to be a man who is abase villain, such as they make him—a man who would tell a lie to deceive the people of New Zealand. But his quondam friends in the House say so. I am going for the sake of argument to admit that he is a villain of the deepest dye ; I am going to admit that he is telling us deliberate lies when he says what I told you just now he had said. Well, supposing that he is as his quondam friendssay he is, if he intends to destroy the land fund, do you think for one moment that there would be any support given to him in his act of spoliation ? Do you think that it would be allowed 1 If there is one present here who thinks so I will ask him to listen for one moment to what I am about to say. In addition to the compact of 185 G, the South Island has from first to last paid to the North Island one million sterling for the quiet and peaceable enjoyment of the land of the South Island, and would we not at once say that if such a spoliation took place we should come with arms in our hands to rescue it. [Cheers] I am not speaking in jest; we would do this if one sixpence of our land revenue were touched, let alone the land. 1 feel that the inhabitants of the South Island are not such poltroons as !.:> sit still under this spoliation, and I warn the Ministry and the North Island that "such spoliation wonld involve instant revolution. I should, if the attempt were persisted in, be prepared, with aims in our hands, to resist such a gross violation of our rights. [Cheers.] Look at the Maories, when they want anything from the Government they say, " Oh, we must frighten them." There is a case in point which occurred recently. The Maories had not got

the Grown grant for certain lands which they desired, and what did they do? "Why they got their English agent to shoot the leaders in the coach when entering upon the road. I am glad, however, to see that the man who did this has been punished, and that the majesty of the law hns been vindicated. Are we going to allow such a robbery of our land fund ? I say no, and if it is necessary we shall not be afraid to shoot the leader of the team. I myself, old as T am, will go into the shooting. I say this, that not one sixpence of our land fund shall be sacrificed. In 1866 I proposed that 500 native lives should be sacrificed in order to obtain peace. I was called a blood-thirsty villain, but what did my opponents do? They set about the work iu an imbecile way. They spent years in doing it, and three millions of mon«y. They took thousands of lives I only asked for 500 and the Almighty only knows how many more perished by those concomitants of war, fatigue and disease. In 1869, perhaps foolishly, I offered to put down the King movement. I did ask to go to England to bring a regiment to this country experienced in conflicts with savages. I did propose to introduce Ghoorkas here, but I will tell you what has been done: £500,000 has been expended, and we have also sacrificed many lives. Now, I contend that no Ministry would be insane enough to raise up so powerful and determined an opposition as would certainly be evinced by applying such an act of spoliation and robbery as to take away our land funds. I hope my words will go forth, and that you will tell all you meet that in this case we would shoot not only the leaders of the team but others also; and when I go into this matter with a halter on my neck, all you will have to tell them to do will be to tighten it. I hold that the'provinces in their day have done a great deal of good, but also harm, and I will tell you how. Look at the House of Assembly. Do we not sec that there are a number of men sitting in the House of Representatives from provinces, not one of which except Otago and Can terbury ought in any way to be permitted to continue the farce of provincial institutions. I may be told that this is not an argument, but the reason of this is due to two circumstances, as regards Canterbury. One is the simplicity of the land laws, and the wisdom and good sense of those men who have been for twenty years been members of'he Council of this province. Depend upon it, Ministers, though in my opinion they have been foolishly rash, are not so rash as to rouse the people of the South Island to defend their rights by armed resistance, and if that sad day should come, I, for one, should be prepared to continue the struggle to the bitter end. But I may be told that those resolutions are preliminary to doing away with the provinces of the South Island. I reply that Canterbury and Otago are the only provinces in which provincial institutions should be allowed to exist, inasmuch, as in all the other provinces provincial institutions are useless for good, and productive of useless expenditure; and when the land of the above-named provinces is disposed of, provincial institutions should cease to exist also. I may be told that provincial institutions have in times past done a great deal of good. I am quite ready to admit that they have. [Bear, hear.] But have not the provincial authorities done on the other hand a good deal of mischief. [Hear, hear.] Let the House of Assembly bear witness. Is it not a great mischief that we see a large province, through its provincial servants holding seats both in the Provincial Council and in the House of Representatives, actually altering the laws regulating the sale of laud year by year in the province to which they belong. Shall I be told that altering the land laws of a country year by year is not mischievous ? [Hear, hear.] I am not going into the question of the causes of this mischievous anomaly. Men who had even an inkling of the principles of political economy in their brains, if they were honest, would not engage in such a monstrous proceeding. But one thing is to me quite clear, that it is an evil which could not exist apart from provincial institutions. I may be told that such anomalous proceedings are not inherently a part of provincial institutions, and that there is a notable exception' in the case of the province of Canterbury. My answer is, that the steady adherence of that province to its original land law. is owing to two circumstances; one is the intrinsic merit and simplicity of the land law itself ; the other is the good sense and honesty of purpose of those men who, during the last twenty years, have been members of the Council of that province. | Loud cheers.] But this exception is not owing to provincial institutions. Again, look at the statute book. How many statutes are disfigured by permissive clauses. [Hear, hear.] .These clauses owe their existence to the provincial authorities in the House. It must be in the memory of you all, that the Premier introduced a Bill last session, for supplying pure water to the city of Auckland. Twelve or fourteen years ago, a Bill was passed sanctioning the raising of a loan for this purpose. But the evil has not yet been remedied. In no stason is the water in Auckland lit to drink. In summer, water is not procurable, and how many children's deaths are owing to the same cause. The Premier, as I said before, introduced last session a Bill to remedy the evil. It was opposed by many of the members of the Auckland province, who at length suggested that the Bill should be passed subject to a clause by which the Bill was prohibited from coming into operatiou until an Ordinance of the Provincial Council of Auckland should be passed. Could absurdity, could wickeduess, go further than this? The compromise was rejected, and the Bill was thrown out, though introduced by the Premier, who, on ordinary occasions, had a large majority. And Auckland is still drinking impure water, because, forsooth, a Provincial Council has special reasons of its own for preventing pure water being introduced into that city. [Hear, hear, and cheers.] That is another evil of provincial institutions. Again, let us look fairly at the great argument adduced by the opponents of the resolutions, viz, that provincial institutions are a guarantee for local self-government. I deny the assertions. Superintendents and provincial functionaries may believe this, but the people know a great deal better. The residents in a certain district in the Province of Nelson held a meeting, and they unanimously agreed that they would subscribe the sum of £llOO, provided that the Provinci .1 Government would add £7OO for the purpose of putting up a fence along the Northern boundary to prevent scabby sheep entering the district in question. As the Provincial Government had received £BOO during the year under the head of scab fines, and as the Road Board was prepared to undertake all the trouble of erecting the fence, it was the firm belief of every member

of the meeting that no opposition would be offered on the part of the Provincial Government. A polite letter giving cover to the resolutions was addressed to the Superintendent, who approved of the measure,and he submitted it to his Executive, who rejected it. The Provincial Council subsequently met, and the member for the district tabled a motion for the purpose of giving effect to the prayer of the meeting. It was opposed by the Provincial Executive, and the motion wa.s lost. I ought to add that the whole of the land of the district had been sold years ago by the Provincial Government, and ninetcnths of the price spent in and about the capital of the province. Does this slight tale speak much iu favor of the local sell government afforded by Provincial Governments. I may also state that the dreaded evil, the scab, has invaded the district from the North, and the residents are nearly paralysed with it. It may be asked what reason exists for carrying the resolutions. 1 answer that at the close of the year 1875 the debt of New Zealand will be in round numbers twenty millions sterling. Very little of this large sum will for a long time to come produce any income. The interest payable annually on the twenty millions will, in round numbers, be at five per cent, including interest aud sinking fund, one million. Our consolidated revenue for the year 1873-4 amounted to £1,420,216. The proposed expenditure for permanent charges and ordinary services for 1874-5 is £1,315.293 With these facts stariDg us in the face additional taxation must inevitably be the result. As prudent men economy must be the order of the day. Double government is an expensive toy. Cheap local government must be substituted in baukrupt provinces for expensive provincial law making institutions. The defence expenditure, now amounting to £130,000 per annum, must be reduced, and then, having reduced all our expenses to the lowest possible amount, we must submit to extra taxation with the best grace that we can. It may be urged that general government is more extravagant than provincial government. I am quite ready to admit that for some years past the extravagance has been great, but then we cannot do without a general government. We cannot afford two governments. Provincial institutions must eventually give way, and if Ministers will not govern the country economically, then they must be removed, and other men put in their places If I were asked to give a practical illustration of the meaning of the phrase used by Shakespeare, " To reason most absurd," I think I could hardly give a more forcible illustration than that with which everyone in New Zealand is familiar, namely a Superintendent of a small province, the annual income of which is not sufficient to defray the salaries of the provincial functionaries, playing with the aid of his provincial Parliament the game of responsible government, enacting one week a ministerial crisis, the next week a change of Ministry, the third week a fresh Ministerial crisis, the fourth week a second change of Ministry, and in the fifth week His Honor the Superintendent dismissing the members of the provincial Parliament with a congratulatory speech to their homes with an amount of honorarium in their pockets in proportion to the distance at which they reside from the provincial capital. [Hear, hear, and laughter.] Gentlemen, there are a number of matters upon which I should like to say a few words, but I fear I have already wearied your patience. I supported the Forests Bill because I felt that the destruction of the forests had been the ruin of countries in other portions of the world. The country round the Sea of Galilee, which, according to Josephus, was heavily timbered and fertile, is now a perfect waste, which is to be attributed to the wholesale destruction of the forests. I should not be doing what the results of my reading and observation on this matter tell me is right, if I did not support the Government who intended to put a stop to the destruction of our forests. I have noticed since 1859 the gradual decrease of our forests, and if it is not stopped now our grandchildren will have cause to regret it. Forests are not made in a day, You can beget a son, and he attains to manhood in 21 years, but, one hundred or one hundred and fifty years will be insufficient to bring your forests to any profitable size. In this part of the country—and I take this opportunity of paying a tribute of praise to ; the people of Christchurch—we have done our duty in this matter, but I want to impress upon you, that it is very easy to cut down trees, but not so easy to restore them. I introduced a bill for the prevention of fire near stacks, the provisions of which I believe to have been very necessary. I only got it passed with a permissive clause to Provincial Councils to have it carried out. One clause was, that any one who lighted a fire close to a hay or corn stack, might be brought up before a resident magistrate, and fined in a sum ranging from one shilling up to one hundred pounds, or in default to be imprisoned for six months. I was told that I was an oppressor, but I ask you whether it was so, when we recollect that a man might go and light a lire near a corn stack and do damage to the extent of some hundreds of pounds. A man such as this would not feel a fine of one shilling, but would one of one hundred pounds. The Bill went up to the Upper House, and though I have cause to be thankful to the Upper House for using its repressive power over the Lower House, it vexed me very much when the Bill was thrown out. Since January last, I have had no less than seven fires on my estate, and I could obtain no redress. It would be no good to fine the man—for I know who it is—one shilling ; and when I applied to the police I was told that they could do nothing in it, though damages to my fences, &c, amounted to a very large sum. Regarding the matter of gauge I may say that I do not approve of the narrow lines now in force in Canterbury. [ Cheers.] My education tells me that on plains such as these the use of the narrow gauge is a mistake. I opposed it vigorously, but it was carried against me. I also introduced an act to empower Provincial Councils to amend fencing laws. I was asked on the hustings to do so, and more particularly as the powers we then possessed to legislate on this matter was limited. The Bill that we had made the resident magistrate the tribunal to which matters should be referred, but wbti the Attorney-General saw this he said at once that it was out of the power of Provincial Councils to legislate. Now, this Act enables the Provincial Council to pass a Fencing Bill, and I hope that the Fencing Act will soon be re-enacted. You will expect me to say a few words on the subject of the honorarium to members. Mr Vogel got this matter referred to a committee. I was not put upon that committee, as my views were well known. For years 1 have opposed this, as you know. The committee was appointed, and by tile

casting vote of the chairman—l think Mr Vogel—an addition of £SO per year was carried and added to the honorarium, making a total sum of £l5O. I suggested that the Government, who do not receive any honorarium, should step aside and let the other members decide it by themselves. I said I should put it to the House, and did so. I was backed up by Mr Rolleston, but we were beaten, and the resolution for £l5O per year was carried. I won't say more on this subject than this, that I think if educated men could feel the honor of serving their country they would do so without being paid. [Cheers.] Not that I say that there are no expenses connected with the position, for applications came in by dozens. No doubt it is not pleasant to live in Wellington for three months out of the year, but I say that I think there should be men public spirited enough, and pure minded enough, to serve the country in which they live—in which they have taken up their abode—for nothing. I want to say a word or two on the College Bill. [Cheers.] I opposed it in the Provincial Council, but was beat, and took the beating kindly, as of course it was no good making any further effort there. Those who carried it in the Provincial Council introduced it into the Assembly. I tried to ascertain what the feeling was on it. I may say that the provincial officials who were members for the province in the House, laid great stress on the majority in favour of the Bill in the Provincial Council, a stress to which, I contend, it was not entitled. I was asked whether it had been discussed in the Provincial Council, and I said " Yes, and it was carried against me." "Oh 1" it was said, "if the Provincial Council have decided upon it, we have nothing to say in it.' 1 Well, myself and those who worked with me, saw that it was useless to attempt to defeat the Bill in the House, but we gained our end, not by going into the battle in the Assembly, where we should have no chance, but in the place where sense was to be found, and where right will always come uppermost. I say this, that while I represent you, or any part of you, I will oppose to the last any attempt to alienate one foot of the property of the public such as this. Now I will refer briefly to the native question. This is a most mysterious question. A member may ask for information in the House, and when he rises to put his question, he is told, " Oh, we shall be very to answer the hon gentleman, but to do so would involve giving information which would not be politic." This is the way we are governed as regards native matters, and this is the way in which they are carried on. I will now read you a few figures regarding the expenditure for native purposes, from 1869 to 1874. They include " The Civil List Act," " The Native Schools Act," and " General Appropriation Act," and the totals are as follows:—1869-70, £31,550 12s lid ; 1870-71, £32,200 ; 1871-72, £33,530 2s 8d ; 1872-73, £41,351 12s 9d ; 1873-74, £39,212 12s 7d, or a total of £177,845 12s 7d. It has always been said that the natives were treated as British subjects, but I contend that it is not so. Let a native get a decree against a European, and it is carried out, but if an European tries to get a decree against a native he will soon find the difference. Sir Donald McLean is a conjuror, and like most conjurors is full of mystery. I have asked questions time after time, but I have been unable to get any information on the subject of native affairs, and I am compelled to say that I knew nothing about it. lam not inimical to the native race; I have lived for thirty years of my life in the;middle of dark races, and have been beloved by them, but I say this, that a dark man is a much worse master than a white man, and if you want to do anything with the dark races, you must show them that you are their master. I will tell you a little incident respecting the Manawatu purchase. This you will recollect, was purchased by the province of Wellington. Sir Donald McLean, however, had given to the natives some 8000 acres in one part, and the Superintendent of Wellington objected, be* cause it had already been bought and paid for. This created a row, and at last Mr Dillon Bell was sent to ascertain what amount they were entitled to as compensation. He said that he would not give anything as compensation for this block, but the province might have a loan of £15,000 at four per cent interest, and one per cent sinking fund for fifty years. But I contend that to give a loan to 'a bankrupt province would not be the proper way to do. The Government had taken it into the Native Land Court time after time, and yet it could not get possession. At last it asked leave to take possession of the land itself, but Mr McLean said "Oh no, if this is done we shall have another war." I voted for the Speaker's award because lithought it was only right that this province should, after asking the Government to put it in possession, have its due. I would like to aßk if two decisions had been issued against a white man, as had been done against these natives, would not the Armed Constabulary have been sent up to put the plaintiff in possession ? No, but the mystery man was sent up and arranged the matter. Gentlemen, I have now to thank you for the attention with which you have listened to me. From the electors of Heatheote and Christchurch, I have always received the greatest consideration. I shall be only too happy on any occasion when you may require me to address you to attend at the place and time appointed. I shall now be hapny to answer any questions. Sir Cracroft Wilson resumed his seat amidst loud cheers, In answer to questions, Sir Cracroft said that if the forests were destroyed on the hills they on the plains would not get such large crops of grain. The destruction of the trees around them had been most distressing, both close here and on Banks' Peninsula. There was no provision for taking the private lands of individuals in the Act so far as he knew. An influential man had been deputed to go round to the North Island Road Boards to ascertain what kind of government was required, and then to be embodied in the Bill to be introduced. Some other questions having been asked of Sir Cracroft Wilson, Mr VV. Wilson rose and proposed the following resolution—" That the electors of the Heatheote district desire to thank Sir Cracroft Wilson for the very lucid description he has afforded this meeting of the active part he has taken in the late session of the General Assembly, and further expresses their renewed confidence in him as their representative." Mr Pavitt seconded the motion, which was agreed to. Sir Cracrift moved a vote of thanks to the chairman, which was carried by acclamation, and the meeting broke up.