MR STOUT’S SPEECH AT CAVERTHAM

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 438, 8 November 1875, Page 3

MR STOUT’S SPEECH AT CAVERTHAM

(Press Telegraph Agency.} Dunedin, November 6. Mr Stout addressed his constituents in the Drillshed, Caversham, last night. The place was crowded. Mr Stout commenced his address by stating that he had taken the earliest opportunity of coming before his constituents since the meeting of the General Assembly, and in doing so, as he had stated on a previous occasion, he thought he was only fulfilling what he regarded as the duty of the representative ‘of so important a district. There was one subject, of course, that seemed as it were to tower aloft above all other subjects at the present time, and that was what was termed the constitutional question, or the form of government under which they were to live in the future. In appearing before them to discuss that question, he wished to state that, although a member —perhaps the youngest member of the Opposition—he did not appear there as the representative of the Opposition. He had not that honor, and he appeared before them simply as one of the Opposition for the purpose of giving a reason for the faith that was in him, and for the action he had taken. After deprecating the discussion of the constitutional question with the personal tone which bad been manifested in some quarters, Mr Stout went on to say it was a matter of great importance to the colony that an,organised Opposition had been formed in the House of Representatives. That Opposition had not been formed as other Opposition had been formed, for the sake of place and power, because the small band of twenty-four or twenty-five who composed the Opposition knew that it was hopeless for them to fight for place or power, but they had successfully exposed wrong doing in the administration of the General (iovernment, and had fought for what they believed to be for the welfare of the colony. [Applause.] After referring to the reports of the committee appointed by both Houses of the General Assembly to enquire into the sale of 60,000 acres of the Piako and Waikato swamp to Mr Russell, the illegal issue of miners’ rights, &c, he said that the reports of those committees showed that not only was illegal trafficking in the lands of the colony carried on through the Government land purchase department, but also that there had actually been trafficking going on between Government and members of both Houses which was enough to bring discredit upon any American ring. Those reports were not brought up by members of the Opposition only, but by committees composed of Government supporters as well, and everyone of those committees contained a member of the Government, who could not venture to dissent from the conclusions arrived at. But there was a remarkable fact in connection with these matters to which he wished to draw attention. Some of these claims had existed for a long time, but until Sir George Grey appeared in the house as leader of the Opposition that they had never been brought to light; and it was also owing to the action of the Opposition that the banking arrangements of the Government with the Bank of New Zealand were thoroughly discussed and inquired into. One thing, for which he thought the Opposition deserved credit, was that they had practically left to the various constituencies the right of determing what their future Government would be, and in doing so they showed that they trusted the people, and believed that the people would not willingly wrong themselves. The more a man considered what the General Assembly had done, and what was the evil of its works, the more ardent a provincialist he would become. The mere cost of the legislative department, without including the salaries of the Ministers, exceeded the cost of all the Provincial Councils, all the Superintendents, and all their “ tails,” as the Provincial Executives were termed. The mere legislative department this year cost about £34,000, while the cost of provincialism, including everything, amounted to only £32,000. So far as economy was concerned, or the management of the business confided to them, the Provincial Councils had all the advantage in a comparison with the General Assembly. He would be quite willing to retire from the scene and allow the abolitionists to have everything their own way, and allow them to show the people what they were going to do towards providing

a substitute for provincialism were it not for two sufficient reasons:—First of all, he did not believe that the people of this colony were abolitionists ; and secondly, he considered it to be the sacred duty of every elector, whether a candidate for a seat or no, to express freely his views whatever they were. He did not believe the people of the colony were abolitionists. He believed that the cry was confined to a few ; and he might separate the abolitionists into several classes Of some he admitted that there were men who had done this colony great service, and who were abolitionists from sincere convictions ; but he believed there were also n large number of electors who were abolitionists because they had nothing else to think about, and had taken their opinions from what might be the views of the majority of the newspapers they had read. The fact was that those abolitionists were afraid of the legislation of the popular Provincial Councils lest their monopolies should be disturbed and their rights infringed. They knew that the pastoral leases would soon expire, and that the popular Councils would insist on the runs being divided, and the people settled on the lands. He was in favor of federalism, and he looked on provincialism as a species of federalism. If the people wanted federalism let them change the federalism, but they should not abolish it. It was very easy to frame paper constitutions but he did not believe it to be the duty of a practical politician to be doing so. It should be his duty to lead the people up. Framing constitutions was not the .way to effect reform. He thought they might consolidate some of the provinces instead of abolishing the provinces altogether. Considering the two principles, and assuming the electors to desire federation, they must, instead of having nine provinces, reduce the number to four or five, and then they might have a good Government. Indeed they must have the Upper House in its present form entirely annihilated. He was one of those who thought that an Upper House was not necessary at all. This was not the first time he had expressed this opinion. He had said it many times before, and if they were to have an Upper House he proposed that it should be formed in a way similar to that proposed when the constitution was framed. He said, and he put this forth tentatively, that the members should be elected by the Provincial Councils. They would then be men who would represent the people, and who would not simply be actuated by class feelings or prejudices. He believed that at present that House did not represent the feelings and desires of the majority of the people of the colony, and he considered that the Upper House should represent the majority. They would also require to have what he might term “ specialisation of function.” There should be no overlapping. Bach Government should have its functions defined, so that it would know what it should do and what it should not do. There should be a guarantee that one Government would not attempt to usurp the functions of the other. He believed they could so separate the functions that they need not have their Colonial House meet more than once in two years to attend to their federal functions, and they should leave greater local control to local bodies to manage their local affairs. The great advantage would be that the people could have their local Government carried on on the spot, and there could be no impurities when the Government and the governed were face to face. That was the sort of change the electors should insist upon, and if they went in for federalism they would have the chance of carrying what they wanted, but if they went in for one Government for each Island they would have no chance of carrying the latter at all. It was nonsense to say that the legislation of the Assembly was better conducted than that of the Provincial Councils. There was another matter which they should insist upon, and that was upon the land question being put upon a proper basis. Unfortunately in the past that question had been so mixed up with the financial question, that people were afraid to touch it. His views on the land question he had stated in public so often, that he need not repeat them. They should insist on this land question being placed on a proper basis. If every elector looked at the question as free from bias as he could, and discussed it calmly and rationally, exercising the ballot as a sacred duty to himself, his country, and to posterity, then they would have an agreed form of Government, and they need care little whether it was provincialism, centralism, or federalism. A unanimous vote of confidence was passed in the speaker.