The Globe. TUESDAY, AUGUST 17, 1875.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 368, 17 August 1875, Page 2

The Globe. TUESDAY, AUGUST 17, 1875.

Although our readers are no doubt getting rather tired of the continued discussion of the abolition question, we venture once more to make a few remarks on the subject. In the present article we wish to direct attention to the tone of the various public meetings which have been held throughout the colony, in order if possible to arrive at some idea of opinions entertained with reference to the provinces themselves, A great deal has been said by the various speakers at those meetings on the impropriety of forcing the passage of the Bills through the House during the present session, and large use has been made of the sounding phrase that a “ moribund parliament” is unfitted to deal with such an important question. Little or nothing, however, has been said in defence of the provinces themselves, It appears to be taken for granted by nearly all the opponents of the Government that the days of provincialism are doomed Nearly all admit that a change is necessary, and that a simpler form of Government must take the place of the present expensive and almost useless system. All that has been ventured to be said, is that the provinces in their day did a large amount of very useful work — that they peopled the country, built bridges and made roads, and produced a frightful crop of useless legislation. So far both the supporters of the Government measures and their opponents agree. Nay more, they also agree that a change is necessary, only the provincialists want the question referred to a new Parliament in order that the people may be consulted. What we wish to point out in the present article is that the admissions of the provincialists cut the ground completely from under their feet. They wish the question referred to the people, and at the same time admit that the people have already made up their minds that provincialism must go. We would therefore ask what object is to be served by delay. Beyond a general approval of, or dissent from, the principle ol abolition they do not mean to say that the electors would be able to instruct their representatives on the details of the measures. Tho new Parliament would be returned pledged to bring about abolition, but the details would be left for the House to deal with.

One of the strongest proofs that the measure is a most favourable one for the Middle Island, is the fact that it is received with great dissatisfaction in Auckland. The people there look with longing eyes towards our land fund, and will be dissatisfied with any measure which does not make it colonial revenue. Because in 1856 they sold their birthright for a mess of pottage, they do not see why they should be kept to a bargain, which ia

depriving them of the means of educating their children, building their hospitals, and feeding their poor, while we in the South are squandering our means in costly works, which will not bo required for generations to come. They point to the fact that the cost of one or two bridges and roads which lead to nowhere in particular, which with princely liberality the Provincial Council of Canterbury has been voting, would have gone far to pay the whole cost of their education for a year. We point out these facts to our Canterbury readers to show them how little they have to gain by delay. Any alterations in the Bills now before the House are almost certain to be less advantageous to the Middle Island, and as it is admitted on all hands that abolition in some shape or other must be carried soon, we are firmly convinced that delays, as far as we are concerned, are dangerous.