SIR CRACROFT WILSON ON THE ABOLITION QUESTION.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 380, 31 August 1875, Page 3

SIR CRACROFT WILSON ON THE ABOLITION QUESTION.

The following is the Hansard report of Sir Cracroft Wilson's speech on the abolition question : Sir Cracroft Wilson—The hon gentleman who has just sat down has thought fit to taunt those who intend to vote for this measure with being disappointed provincialists. I hardly think it good taste to throw out such a hint, though it has been repeated once or twice during the debute. There is one painful part connected with tins taunt, and that is that it compels almost every member to apeak of himself at the outset. Sir, I am no paid servants the pro-

vince. I am a member of the Provincial Council ; I am the head of the Executive of the province ; yet I shall vote for this Bill, and I do it in all honesty of purpose and in all integrity. I trust the hon gentleman, when he talks of disappointed men voting for this Bill, will, at any rate, except me from among the number. 1 have listened most attentively to the hon member, and, as far as my limited intellect will allow me to go, it strikes me that the burden of his speech is—" Myself and family first, next the province of Otago, and last of all the country of New Zealand." My views are diametrically opposite to those. I think first of the country of my adoption, I think then of the proviuce, and last of all I think of myself. I am very sorry I cannot agree with the conclusions at which the hon gentleman has arrived. But to quit the subject of the hon member : I have got a painful task before me, which I am sure I wish I could escape from. I mean an allusion to the occurrences of yesterday in this House. The hon member for Auckland City West must know that I am speaking the truth when I say that I look up to him, and not only esteem him as a private friend, but revere him with honor as a public servant of the State ; and when I saw the course he was adopting yesterday it pained me more than I can express. The course pursued yesterday was justified under the simile of the hare before the ferocious greyhound; and I perfectly agree with the hon member in the truth of the line by Somerville the poet — " Poor is the triumph o'er the timid hare." But it will never do for the hon gentleman to. compare himself with that long-eared frightened animal. We all know that he has been in many a dangerous field, and is as brave as a lion. There is no timidity about him, and if he could find a simile inappropriate to himself I should think it is the one of the hare before the greyhound. All I can say is, that I much fear if the course adopted last night is continued, there are many members in this House whose irritation will rise to such a degree that they will forget that honorable member's former services, and he will be treated to language the roughest that parliamentary usage will allow. Nothing would pain me more than that all my old associations should be broken up and set aside simply because the honorable gentleman choqses to put himself at the head of a party who adopted a course similar to that pursued last night. The inevitable result of that must be, and I say this with some experience of the usages of this House, that honorable members will not be tender in the language they will use towards the honorable member for Auckland City West if such a course is repeated. I hope and trust I shall not see it again, at least during this session. The hon member, in a speech which he delivered, choose to make a fierce onslaught upon the Upper House. The onslaught was very objectionable, and, moreover, the arguments used were very fallacious. The hon gentleman said, —

" I think we ought to have the right to criticise the acts of the other branch of the Legislature, for many causes and for many reasons. 1 desire, on the present occasion, that a real historical picture of the existing state of the colony at the present time should be preserved, that it should be known to our posterity what is the name of the Constitution which the present Government have determined to destroy—what is the nature of that part of it which they have determined to permanently establish in this country. The other night the hon member for Taieri made a speech to this House which produced a very powerful impression on the minds of future historians, and the consideration of which will I hope, cause the Government to pause in the course they are about to pursue; for I believe that, if they do not pause of their own free will, the voice of the people of the country, when these circumstances come to be considered, will make them pause, The hon member for Taieri told us, in terms of congratulation, that upon a recent occasion 7000 acres of land were opened to settlers, to be taken up upon the deferred payment system, in the province of Otago—that for those 7000 acres five hundred applicants appeared, applying for an area of 144.000 acres, and that their demand could in no way be met out of 7000 acres; and the lidu gentleman went on to tell us, in reference to a Bill which he introduced into this House—a Bill to amend the Otago Waste Lands Act—that he desired to make that Bill so extensive that the wants of the settlers in Otago might in some degree be met, adding—with 'bated breath, I was sorry to see, and with an attitude of submission which I think was unnecessary—that he dared not make proposals which were requisite and proper, because similar proposals had been rejected by the other House, and that he would not succeed in getting this Bill through that branch of the Legislature unless he made similar restrictions. I imagine some Macaulay or Prescott, who has yet to write the history of New Zealand, representing these five hundred so-called freemen of the province of Otago struggling round the land office, and begging that each of them might receive a modicum of land from the public estate. Their modest demand was for homesteads of 200 acres each. The answer was, that there were only 7000 acres for them all, and that more dared not be asked for, for fear that the law would not be assented to by the Upper House. Why, sir, these five hundred men were the virtual owners of the soil. They had a just claim, a right, to that which they asked for, and the persons by whose will it was taken from them were representative of nobody but the successive Ministers who have occupied those benches. They had no right whatever to legislate in their own interests—to take from their fellow-countrymen that which was their own." Now, Sir, what is the real state of that case 1 That it is a very pretty picture I admit, and no doubt an artist would transfer it to canvas, and make a very sensational picture of it ; but, unfortunately, it happens not to be true. I have no wish that any future Macaulay or Prescott should be misled, unintentionally no doubt, by such a statement as that I have quoted ; but the truth is, that the Upper House, styled " the representatives of nobody but the successive Ministers who occupy the Government benches have not legislated in their own interests in the matter of the Otago waste lands. The persons who are to blame for the state of things pictured by my hon friend—- " five hundred so-called free men of the province struggling round the Land office, and begging that each of them might receive a modicum of land from the public estate"— are not the members of the Upper House, but the members of the House of Uopruseutatives returned by the five hundred men

alluded to and their brethren. This may appear impossible, but it is the fact. I fear I must trouble the House with some his torical events which will take me backseveral years—namely, as far as 1862. Previous to that year titles to land in the province of Otago were in a very great state of confusion. Land had been sold with improvement conditions; the improvements had not been made, the land had in many instances been transferred, and the Crown grants could not be issued. To remedy this state of things, this House passed in the session of 1863 the Otago Waste Lands Act No 2, hoping thereby to enable the Government of Otago to realize the balance of the 40* per acre due by purchasers, and cause the Crown grauls to bo given. With the permission of the House, I will read the preamble of the Act, and the purposes for which it was passed : "Whereas it is expedient to make such provision as may tend to secure the bona fide occupation of rural land in the province of Otago as soon as may be after the sale thereof by the Crown, and that a tax shall be imposed jupon unimproved lands : And whereas great quantities of rural land have been sold under the Waste Lands regulations for the said province made by the Governor in Council on the 12th day of February* 1856, the purchasers whereof were bound, under the said regulations, to expend the sum of 40s per acre thereon, respectively, before being entitled to receive Crown grants thereof ; and many of such purchasers have not fulfilled the said conditions, and it is desirable to remove the confusion and inconvenience thence arising, and to enable such purchasers to obtain Crown grauts on certain conditions being performed by them."

What those balances were, Sir, perhaps is better known to yourself than to me. I could never find out the amount. But one thing I do know, and that is that, though the Act was passed by this House, not a sixpence of those instalments that were due was ever paid to the Provincial Government of Otago. The Act became a total failure. The Commissioner of Customs was in the House at the time, and he knows perfectly well the truth of what I am saying. Not a sixpence of the sums due on the promised conditions was collected. How the titles got free and how the Crown grants were issued I don't know, but the conditions were not performed, and the payments were not made by'the people to whom the land was sold. I have been obliged to go into these circumstances because I wish to lead the House up to the reasons why I think the Provincial Government of Otago were to blame if any poor men in the province could not get as much land as they could pay for. Between the provinces of Southland and Otago there have been introduced in twelve years twenty-seven different land laws into this House. I wonder whether the people in England would believe me when I said so: I doubt whether they would. And there were actually sixteen different land laws passed during that period applicable to those provinces. Why, when with reference to land, the most conservative thing that has to be dealt with, such changes in the laws take place, what can we expect ? Can any man get his rights, or retain his rights, under such circumstances? I say it is -itterly impossible. Well. Sir, two sessions ago the members from Otago introduced the principle of selling land on deferred payments, thus bringing back all the confusion which ex ; sted in the province previous to 1863. Many members who have eat for years in this House, and who know the ciicumstances I have just detailed, are adverse to any measure which is calculated to bring back the original confusion. On this account they cousider that no land should be sold on deferred payments. Moreover, they know that dealings involving money transactions, and the payment of money by voters to persons who have been elected to office by them, and who may again stand for election, are liable to very serious abuse. On these grounds the members I have referred to have opposed the adoption of the principle of selling land on deferred payments, and have suggested the introduction of the principle of free selection, by which any man can get as much land from a land office as he has money to pay for. At length a land law was passed by this House authorising the Provincial Government of Otago to put up 100,000 acres for sale on deferred payments. When that Bill went into the Upper House, the members there, being well aware of what occurred twelve years ago, hesitated to allow such a large area to be put up for sale on deferred payments, possibly deeming it unjust to those who had bought land and paidready money for the same. They reduced the quantity of land to 30,000 acres, and I think few men would be bold enough to blame the members of the Upper House that, seeing the miserable failure of the original Act of 1856, and the miserable failure also of the Act of 1863, which was passed by the House solely to remedy the evils which had been brought about by the system of deferred payments, which is another name for the improvement conditions, the members of that House reduced the quantity to 30,000 acres, considering that the system was an experiment. There is not the least doubt that the sale of land under the Act of 1856, in Otago—under the improvement clauses—inflicted a very severe pecuniary loss upon that province, and put a good deal of money into the pockets of men who were not in any way entitled to it. Sir, if the cry of land for the poor man has a particle of honesty in it, let the Otago members bring in a Bill for free selection, and it shall have my support. In my opinion, nothing can be more unjust than to impute blame to the members of the Upper House for what is the result of the conduct of the Otago members in this House. Those members really care very little for the poor man. What they care for is the system of hundreds, by means of which they can graze cattle for little or nothing, and which free selection, the real boon to small farmers, would utterly destroy. The Upper House has, on several occasions, saved New Zealand from real calamities ; and I am indignant when I hear unjust aspersions made by members of this House against the members of that House. If I am asked if I think the principle of deferred payments advisable in a country where every man has a vote, and where those who administer the provinces owe their position to those votes, 1 would call attention to a report which prevailed in this very town some years ago. At the time—l speak under correction—l think there was a balance due by immigrants to the tune of £28,000, and the report went on to say that if they voted for a certain man as Superintendent those instalments would occasion no anxiety for the following three or four years. Now, Sir, had there been no deferred payment*, and had not those amounts been due by immigrants, that

shameful and disgraceful occurrence, if it be true, would not have taken place. Such, has been the result of the working of the stem of deferred payments. I have given • lory of the case, and my facts cannot bo do i ,>lecl, although, of course, my inferences may bo wrong, but I believe they are correct. Another subject to which I think T ought to refer is the amount of vituperation that has been bestowed upon my honorable friend the member for Timaru. He .has been charged with deserting his party, throwing the House into a state of chaos, and heaven knows what other crimes have not been imputed to him, because he said, " I will not lead the Opposition this year." Sir, there may be ciicumstances—and I appeal to those who know anything of parliamentary government—in which it is almost impossible for an honest man to lead an Opposition. The Government of this country may have got matter, into such a mess that no honest man would undertake to put them straight. Liabilities may have been incurred, and obligations entered into without end ; there may be uuhappiness and uncertainty as to whether a loan can be raised by a particular date, and, after all, whether the great scheme can succeed or not. In such a case I say it is the duty of an honest man, wno has hitherto been leading the Opposition, to turn round and say, "It is not fair for me to lead the Opposition now, for I am not prepared to take office if the members composing the Government leave their benches." I care not who objects to that reasoning. All I can say is, I believe it to be honest and sound reasoning; and if the hou member for Timaru acted under that impulse, I sink she was perfectly justified. Have not other members of this House refused to take office with Sir Julius Vogel, under fear and dread of the confusion and misery which will possibly eventuate when this scheme is wound up ? We all know what would have been the position of New Zealand if the last four millions had not been raised. What was the phraseology used ? " New Zealand is in a mess. We must have the money, and if we can't get it we don't know what to do." Of course a man anxious to obtain office at all hazards would go i i and run a muck ; but that a conscientious man may refuse to lead an Opposition under the circumstances I have alluded to is a position which cannot be objected to. Sir, in referring to the principles of this Bill, I may say I have been pretty consistent throughout my career in this house. I am perfectly well aware that those who are for the time being one's enemies sometimes Hansardize a man with the view of proving his inconsistency. 1 shall Hansardize myself to prove my consistency. In a debate, in 1869, I am reported to have said—

" In 1863 I myself tried my utmost to save provincial institutions. I saw that they were going beyond all limits, and I introduced a Bill into this House, the object of which was to prevent any person having a seat in this House who received a salary from any province whatever. I saw in those days, what ever credit this House may give me or not, that the government of the colony as a whole was becoming very nearly impossible, and I saw that it was absolutely necessary that the sphere of Provincial Councils should certainly not extend to this House. Many honorable members will remember the fate of that Bill. I recollect my honorable friend the member for Mataura—and he will forgive me calling it to his recollection—did me the honor on one occasion to go to the walls of the House of Assembly in Auckland, and tear down one of the lists of names of the representatives of the people, and he then took his pen and affixed a mark to the names of twenty seven members, I think—of course I speak under correction—showing that the greater part of them were I may safely say, receiving provincial salaries, and certainly every one of whom had been more or less connected with Provincial Governments. He then facetiously asked me, in that happy way in which he is equalled by few members, if so marjy members of that House were going to cut their throats. The hon member was wiser in his generation than I was. I really did think I might have some influence when I uttered to this House what I believed would ultimately come to pass. That, Bill was thrown out by those provincial officers as members of this House, and if it escaped being trodden upon it was probably a fortunate circumstance. I now hear proposals from a man who has studied this subject very carefully for doing away with these provincial Governments altogether. Sir, I trust the time is not far off when I shall be most happj to enter into the consideration of this subject. I was of opinion that they were costly, and, in fact, I think I once uttered the sentiment in Canterbury, that it took two uneducated men to govern one educated man. That was my view of Provincial Governments, that we have got Governments above our wauts."

I believe that had this House consented to consider the Bill 1 sought to introduce in 1863, provincial institutions might have lasted perhaps longer than they are now likely to last. I have not changed my opinions since those words were uttered, some six or seven years past. I am firm in the belief that for the good of the colony provincial institutions as they now exist should cease, and I can say that I have not swerved from that opinion; but, had I found anything that would have induced me to depart from it, I certainly should have felt bound to accept the reasons which led iu that direction. Sir, I have heard a groat deal about the liberty of the people, and 1 may say I have heard a great deal of claptrap. Is it necessary for a man to be ftee that he should be entitled to vote for members for two Parliaments? Is there any man in England that has power to vote for two Parliaments, and are not Englishmen free 1 At any rate, the man who says that a voter is deprived of his freedom if he is prohibited from voting for members of a second Parliament must prove it to me. The Constitution of England says that a mau is free, and ho has not the power of voting for two Parliaments. Some honorable gentleman has said in this debate that it was the necessity of the colony that induced the introduction of this Bill. I am perfectly well aware that the necessities of the colony have a great deal to do with it ; there is no doubt about it. I venture to say that when the provinces brought themselves into such a position that it was found necessary for the continuance of their existence to consolidate their loans, that was, to use a vulgar phrase, the first nail in their coffins: and when the General Government undertook the administration of public works, that was the second nail; but whether there are more nails ui not in the provincial coffins is very little to I he purpose. With regard to the question of economy, I will say that while Provincial

I Governments exist we can never havj J economy ; yet I do not say that the converse ; of this proposition is true, and that we shall | have economy after the provinces are i abolished ; but economy will be possible. Of course our institutions are human, and all likely to err. Have we not seen these boasted Road Boards do mean and contemptible acts 1 And are we not likely, unless the people themselves elect proper men to govern those Load Boards, to get into the very same difficulties in which we have already floundered 1 If the people will no*" elect men of probity to the Uoad Boards, but elect men whose characters are damaged in the Supreme Court, and who have been on the verge of bankruptcy several times, then the last state of the case will be worse than the first. lam not going to deceive myself with regard to this Bill, but I know one thing : that all economical arrangements arc perfectly impossible under the Provincial Councils as they now exist; and I say that if they are done away economy will be possible ; but it will depend a great deal on the pood sense of the people in the different districts. Sir, we have heard a great deal about liberty, but we have not heard of the wonderful electrical effects that are produced upon men by' their being elective chiefs of provinces. Some men get so elated by it that they seem inflated with a kind of gas ; other men become emasculated by it ; indeed, it is one of the most extraordinary processes that the world ever saw. I know an instance in wh'ch one Superintendent declared solemnly that his services were so valuable to the province that he could not serve the province under £2500 a year. It was suggested to him that as the' Judge got £I7OO he might perhaps be satisfied with £ISOO a year; but he would not accept it, and, indeed, I think he resigned because the Provincial Council was not subservient enough to give the sum he asked. | " Name, name."] • I leave to those who are ignorant of the history of New Zealand, but who presume to give judgment upon different-, matters, to search the records, and they will find out that what I have stated is perfectly correct. That is a case of an inflated Superintendent. Another Superintendent once did a very peculiar thing. I do not suppose his Provincial Council knew anything about it—he converted his house into a prison one day I think another Superintendent, after having given a solemn pledge that the railway works connected with a tunnel should be paid for out of loau, and that none of the proceeds of the land fund should .be devoted to the purpose, finding himself flush of cash, did himself buy up, and very properly, in my opinion, the first £50,000 debentures of that tunnel loau. Well, so far he was perfectly right. He did great good to the credit of the province, and there is no doubt that he was right in doing this, rather than leave it in the coffers of the bank. But what did he do afterwards ? As a member of the Provincial Council, I remember, some two years afterwards, I inquired what had become of these £50,000 debentures and to my horror, I learned that they had been put behind the fire, and that, too, after a solemn pledge had been given that none of the proceeds of the land fund should ever be spent in the tunnel. That is an illustration of another gas - inflated Superintendent. Then there arc others who are so emasculated, by the process tnat they dare not issue a certain order, even in accordance with law, because of the fear as to how it might affect the votes at the next election. There is no doubt that the American States were quite right when they said that no President of the State ought to be re-elected a second time. I think it has occurred once in the case of Washington, and once in the case of Grant ; I believe that they have been elected President twice over. But I dare say I shall not be unparliamentary when I say that if the Father of Lies had been consulted as to how he could ruin a man, it would be by making it possible for him to be re-elected a Superintendent at a provincial election. I say that Provincial Councils and Provincial Governments are not angels. I have also said that I have seen bitter things done by Road Boards ; but whether this Bill will better us or not is a questi ;u. It will render at any rate, as I said before, economy possible. I have seen it paraded, and I have heard it paraded in this House, that the parental care bestowed by Provincial Councils and Superintendents upon the provinces placed under their charge can never be replaced by anything external. Well, lam old enough to remember one district in a province in which the whole land had been sold, and the rivers were left uubridged. Any unfortunate settler living in that district had to choose the alternative of cither risking the being drowned, or not, crossing the river. Having been persecuted almost to despair by scab in their Hocks, they had a meeting, and they agreed to subscribe £llOO, and they applied to the Provincial Government of the province for assistance. I believe the Superintendent was in favor of the grant asked for, of £7OO, to supplement their £llOO, to make a fence between that particular part of the country in order to protect their ilocks from scab. That Provincial Government had exacted everything they could from the people whose Hocks were diseased ; but do you think they would give the £7OO, to assist them in erecting a fence to protect their sheep ? An hon Member—Where was it 1 Sir Ceaokoft Wilson—Go to history, and learn. An hon Mkmu»tt—Whose run was it? Sir CBAOBOFT Wilson—lt was a district; p.o run was ever mentioned. That is a sample of the conduct of these parental Governments. 1 must do the Superintendent this justice; that 1 believe that so perfectly aware was he of the justice of the demand, that he was perfectly willing that the £7OO should be granted in aid of these unfortunate people. Ho proposed it to his Provincial Council. We know what became of it. The wind saw the grant, but nothing else ever did. I think I have detained the House long enough. All I shall say now is this : whatever may be said about the taunt that disappointed men in the provinces are voting for this Bill, I have nothing whatever to gain by the Bill. I draw in the Provincial Executive no salary; I believe I have spent a good deal of my own money on certain occasions, but I derived no benefit. My vote is given from pure, unselfish motives. I am not like many men in this House of whom, if I were in the ha\ut of retorting taunt for (aunt, I would say that their salaries and their very existence depended upon the existence of the provinces. Ido not say that it is so; but they ought not to taunt me with being personally interested in the passing of this Bill. I love the provinces. I love Canterbury dearly; but 1 love New Zealand far more.