ECCENTRICITIES FROM HANSARD.

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 1039, 24 October 1877, Page 3

ECCENTRICITIES FROM HANSARD.

A DISTINCTION WITH A DIFFERENCE. The Hon. Dr Pollen —The hon. gentleman (Colonel Whitmore) has said that there is a kind of anomaly in the constitution of this Court of Appeal; that it was, I think he said, “ an appeal from Philip drunk to Philip sober ; ” —I am, unfortunately, not always able to catch the hon. gentleman’s observations. The Hon. Colonel Whitmore—The hon. gentleman has improved my remark. I simply said it was “an appeal from Fenton to Fenton.” A SORRY PICTURE. The Hon. Captain Fraser— Hon. gentlemen in the Council had very little idea of what a diggings town was. Imagine a long dusty street with iron and wooden shanties, nothing to relieve the eye, nothing to occupy the mind, nothing but billiards, and gambling—gambling, drinking, and billiards, from morning till uight. .Now, if they had an athenaeum with a reading-room well supplied ■with books, numbers of people would go there, and they might bo very certain that, when once a man began to read and to have a taste for intellectual occupation} tliere would

be no fear of his going through the liquor bars of the drinking-shops into a lunatic asylum, or through the hells behind the bars into the gaol. members’ mother’s bosom. Dr. Wallis—ln the old mythology I read of a certain giant whose name was Briareus, a son of Mother Earth. He w r as engaged in a fight with Hercules. Again and again Hercules knocked down the giant, who fell prostrate on the bosom of his Mother Earth ; but, coming in contact with his mother’s bosom, his strength always returned, and he rose up fit to fight again. Now we, the representatives of New Zealand, are as the giant, and the constituencies are our Mother Earth, and when sent back to them we fall as it were on her bosom, our strength returns, and we rise with renewed vigour to fight the battles of freedom, equality, and fraternity. On these grounds, and in the hope of having a dissolution, I will vote for the amendment of the honourable member for Dunedin City. STEALING THE HORSE. Mr Bowen—The hon. member for Riverton (Dr. Hodgkinsor) said that some persons might steal a horse while others might not look over the hedge. Well, the proverb is a very true one, and I have often been reminded of it while listening to some of the talk about unparliamentary language. lam bound to say that in that respect the hon, gentleman invariably steals the horse. To my knowledge there is no other member in the House who is iu the habit of using unparliamentary language so frequently as the hon. gentleman himself. He always steers to the very verge, and tries how near he can go to the line without stepping over it. But I bear the hon. gentleman no malice, because I do not think he means what he says. I will tell the House why I think so. It 'is because I have always noticed that the hon. gentleman, when he meets outside the House those whom he has denounced in such shocking language, is inclined to address them in the most friendly way. The language which he sometimes uses to us is so strong that I am surprised that he should wish to speak to us outside. I w r ould not speak to any person against whom I used such strong language, and I should think that the hon. gentleman ought to be guided by somewhat similar principles. LIBEL ON DRUMMER BOYS. Mr Wason —Take the hon. member for Avon. How did he treat the Separation question last year, when it excited so much anxiety throughout the colony ? The hon. gentleman was very active in the lobbies, out of the House, and in the House, urging the question of Separation ; yet, when it came to the vote, he voted against the motion. Mr Rolleston—Quite incorrect. Mr Wason —I am not going to quote from “Hansard,” but I have a vivid recollection of the hon. gentleman’s opinion on Separation. Mr Rolleston —I have never on any occasion advocated Separation on the floor of this House. Mr Wason —The hon. member did not advocate it in this House ; but he took up a position which reminded me very much of the small drummer boy, who beats up the recruits, excites their military ardour, and then, when the actual war-cry is sounded, slinks away to the rear, where he takes very good care of himself, and sometimes goes to the opposite side. Hon. members of this House know the hon. member for Avon very ■well. They know very well that he invariably assumes a tone of high-handed morality, and lectures the members of this House like so many good little boys. But let us suppose that “ the man in the street ” inquires who is this hon. member who with such grace lectures the House, and -who with such high-handed morality preaches to everybody else. This inquisitive outsider would say, “ Surely he, of all men, must bo deemed to be immaculate. Surely he who flings stones about in this careless fashion does not dwell in a glass house. Surely he takes care to live in a house of stronger material than that.” But I say his house is made of that description of glass which does not admit the cheerful sunlight or the beautiful rays of the moon. It is glass of the commonest and thickest material, which one cannot see through, but which is shattered by the very smallest pebble. MR ROLLESTON REVIEWED. Mr Wason —The hon. member (Mr Rolleston) is continually harping on provincialism. It is impossible that he can let that question alone even at this stage of our history, and we have the old question of abolition v provincialism revived, and the old arguments repeated, showing that the hon. member is still hankering after the “flcshpotsof Egypt” and the emoluments of office. We have had the whole thing over again, and even to the action taken by the hon. gentleman at the time when the Education Bill was passed, which was contrary to Lis expressed convictions. Did he then exercise the power of veto confided to him by the Constitution ? No ;he shirked the responsibility, and showed that he was unworthy of his office. Again, there was the unfortunate dispute which occurred between the Provincial Executive and certain discontented railway officials. What was the action of the hon. member ? Did ho came forward manfully, and put his shoulder to the wheel ? No ; he again shirked his duty, and allowed abler and better men than himself to fight the battle out, to fight the question, and to receive all the opprobrium and unpopularity which invariably attach to men in administrative capacities who endeavour to do their duty faithfully, honestly, and regardless of popular outcry. In this case, the honorable gentleman, after overriding his Executive, pats the discontented men on the back, calls them good little boys, hopes they will not do it again, and ushers them blandly out of hi r oom with the cry ringing in his cars, “ Long lire Ids Honor ! God bless your Honor! ” This is the sort of thing we have had in Canterbury, and it has done more than anything else to disgust the people there with the system of government under which they lived, and has, in almost every case, sent up Abolitionist members from Canterbury to this Assembly.