POST-SESSIONAL SPEECHES.

Globe, Volume IX, Issue 1218, 28 January 1878, Page 3

POST-SESSIONAL SPEECHES.

Mil ROLLESTON AT PAPANUI. According to announcement, Mr Rolleston met his constituents in the schoolroom at Papanui on Saturday evening. There was not a large attendance at the meeting. On the motion of Mr Matson, Mr Norman took the chair, and briefly introduced Mr Rolleston.

Mr Rolleston began by giving a sketch of the position of the Atkinson Ministry at the beginning of the session, and the reasons which increased the opposition to them. With reference to the Middle Party, he said:—“ I may say that I was not the leader of that party, nor was I one of its founders, though I voted with it from the time that it became publicly known as a party. [A VoiceA great pity !] I may say, as I told the electors last year, in this room, I had dissociated myself from Sir George Grey. He was previously acting with me as a promoter of Provincial institutions. I think he was right, and thought so then and voted witli him, but when Sir George allied himself with Mr Macandrew, and adopted that gentleman’s separation policy, and took an extreme view with regard to the land fund, and particularly opposed himself to the interests of Canterbury, I dissociated myself from him. I was, therefore, not a member of his party, nor was I associated witli Major Atkinson’s ministry, because I thought they had done a great wrong by allowing themselves to be driven, by a combination of different sections of the House, into adopting the Abolition policy,which I think lias been most mischievous to the country. I was, therefore, in a difficult position, as being at,tached to neither party in the House. With regard to the Middle Party, I think there is always a very considerable difficulty attached to the existtenco of such, a body of members in any Parliament, and I think, after the experience which I have had in this session, that the advisability of the formation of such parties is very questionable. The Middle Party, however, was constituted, and the members of that party were strongly dissatisfied with Major Atkinson’s Ministry. At the same time they felt that they could not follow Sir George Grey as a leader. With that understanding, that Sir George Grey was not to bo the loader, a considerable number of members joined the Middle Party. That was part of their programme, that Sir George Grey would not lead in the formation of a new Government. The Middle Party believed that there were in the Assembly the elements of a good and stable Ministry independent altogether of the followers of Sir George Grey or of the Ministry of Major Atkinson. I would like to road to you what was said by one gentleman who joined that party, Mr Curtis; — I quote from Hansard. “ Shortly afterwards a new party was formed, under the name of the ‘Middle Party,’ and I ultimately joined it, because I came to the conclusion, later in the session, that the Government were unable to carry on the business of the House in a manner to be satisfactory to the country. I was further of opinion that they would not be sulfieiently powerful to venture to prepare such measures during the recess as would place the finance of the colony on a more substantial basis Before I joined

the Middle Party, I received most distinct assurances from his immediate friends that the hon. member for the Thames would not take office, and that no one or his immediate followers would do so. Had I not received that assurance I certainly would not have joined the party. A vote of no confidence in the late Government was then moved and carried.” There is no doubt whatever that had Sir George Grey moved the vote of want of confidence instead of the gentleman (Mr Larnach) who at that time was unknown to the political world, there would have been no change of Ministry. There was then a very natural feeling of disappointment on the part of those people who thought as the Middle Party did, when the vote of want of confidence having been carried it appeared that Sir George Grey’s followers were determined to have him placed at the head of the next Government. It was natural that they who had been, I must use the word, misled, should feel so aggrieved that they were determined to have nothing to do with the party thus placed under the leadership of one with whose opinions they could not agree. When this change of Ministry had taken place the whole House was anxious to see what the programme of the new Ministry would be, particularly as Sir George Grey and Mr Macandrew had recently been associated together in the organisation of a strong movement for separation. There was, as you know, a convention formed at Dunedin, the object of which was the separation of the province of Otago from the rest of the colony. Mr Macandrew had openly stated that there was but one remedy for the present ailments of the colony, and that was the constitution of a separate colony of Otago. He further associated Sir George Grey with him. He said, :i We shall have the co-operation of Sir George Grey.” [Mr Bolleston hero read an

extract from Mr Macandrew’s address to the convention.] As you will recollect, the convention determined that Sir George Grey and Mr Macandrew were to go home and present a petition to the homo Government praying for separation of the province of Otago, They did not go home, as it was found that Sir George Grey’s state of health would not permit him. It was not unnatural that men should feel that they could not support a Ministry the heads of which wore the champions of this movement for the separation of Otago from the rest of the colony. Either those were their principles which they were bound to do their best to bring into action, or—but they were hound to give effect to them. The enunciation of the policy of the Government to begin with was not satisfactory on that point and on the point of the land fund, and immediately the question arose whether or not the Grey Ministry was to bo retained in power. Major Atkinson has been blamed most unjustly as I think. He has been accused of having shown an undue haste and a greed to return to ofiice. He has been accused of this because he moved a vote of want of confidence in the new Ministry of Sir George Grey. It is open to question whether it was wise to move such a motion at such a time, but I knowthatthe feeling of those who supported that motion, and I was one of these, was that it was better to settle this question at once, and after it had been settled to proceed to business, because it was pretty generally known, as you will see from the explanation I have already given you that Sir George Grey did not possess a majority in the House. That vote of want of confidence would have been carried but for what I may be allowed to call a fluke. I may say for my own part that I think it was a great pity that some other leader who would have represented a change of Government could not be found, but Major Atkinson was not responsible for that, since so large a number of the members of the House would have him move it. It was impossible to have any other, and it is not fair to lay upon him the charge of greed for olfice and avidity to seize it when he only did what was pressed upon him by the majority of the House. Such charges, I think, are very much better left alone. I think, on the other hand, that there has been a very great difficulty, and there will be a great difficulty for years to come, in getting men to take upon themselves the troubles and disegreeableness of office. What will be the issue for the Government of Sir George Grey I cannot tell, but at any rate he will now have what has been claimed for him, a fair trial. We shall during the next session have his measures submitted to us, and then will be the time for Parliament to judge whether he shall remain in ofiice or not. I think it would be very unwise for members to pledge themselves to retain any party in office. It may be that one shake for a new administration may not be enough, and my ,view is that we ought not to be afraid of having a change of Government continually, whenever anew Government would represent a decided change in opinion as to the way in which public affairs shall be carried on. Up to the present time I must say that what has occurred has not led me to think that I was not justified in opposing Sir G. Grey, for it did not follow that because I did not agree with Major Atkinson I should necessarily agree with Sir George Grey, more especially seeing that the movement for removing Major Atkinson was on the xmder standing that Sir George Grey was not to take ofiice or he recognised as the chief of the next Government.” Mr Rolleston then went onto give a resume of the legislation of last session. With reference to the policy'of Sir G. Grey, he said : —“ The first and most striking point of this is, of course, with reference to the land fund. Well, gentleman, I am of opinion that the whole legislation with regard to the taking of the land fund has been unfortunate, because the land fund has not been dealt with upon any certain and defined principles. It was proposed to take a portion of the land fund of Otago and Canterbury up to a certain amount to balance the finance of the colony, and also to deal exclusively with those parts of the colony. I venture to think, gentlemen, that this was a most unfortunate proposal on the part of Major Atkinson. 1 think that it would be far better to have some defined method of dealing with the land fund, and last year I explained to my constituency in this room generally my views of looking at this question of the land fund. These views were to this effect. On the introduction of Sir Julius Yogol’s policy of public works and immigration, which necessitated the appropriation of the land fund to certain objects, that land fund ceased then to that extent —that is to the extent that the General Assembly appropriated it—to be provincial revenue. From that time the question became to a great degree, what part of the land fund should be localised, and belong to the district in which it was raised, and what part to the colony which then took upon itself the control and direction of public works and immigration ? When the colony took up these subjects we could not expect to get the portion of the land fund which belonged exclusively to immigration and public works. I saw further that the carrying out of the abolition policy was another blow to our retention of the remainder of the land fund. I told the constituency last year when I addressed you that I thought the views entertained by Mr Stafford on this matter were such as would probably obtain acceptance. MrStafford declared that he would not be a party to putting the improvident and provident provinces on the same footing, that he would not be a party to taking the Canterbury land fund for the benefit of those parts of the colony which had been improvident, and had parted with their landed estate at a mere nominal value. That the price of land should be the same all over the colony, but that those parts which had husbanded their revenue should receive special consideration before those who had let the land go into the hands of large capitalists. These, gentlemen, I consider are the principles which should guide the permanent appropriation of the land fund. The Wakefield theory is to return to the land from the revenue raised from it in the shape of public works and immigration in order to give access to the land and increase its value. [Hear, hear.] On this principle I have acted and I think it would be only fair to do so in the future. Principles of this kind would he necessary under existing circumstances to be carried out in dealing with the land fund, and seeing the financial difiicullies which are likely to come upon us are what wo are fairly entitled to have brought about. But a verv different proposition to this was brought qown and carried by Sir George Grey —very different indeed. But Sir Qcorge Grey’s proposals give us no guarantee of continuance. He proposes to give 30 per cent, to the counties all over the colony. E\it there is no guarantee that this will continue, [and morfl

than this, I think that the way this has been brought about under the Crown Lands Sale Act is likely very shortly to bring it to an end. It is provided by that Act that land all over the colony shall bo sold at £1 per aero by auction, and £2 per acre by free selection. What is tins I would ask you but stopping the settlement of the country. It is neither settling the country now or giving satisfaction to us. My own view in regarding a proposal of this kind—and here I may say that this was said by mo at a meeting of gentlemen opposed to Sir George Grey—was that though there might be a majority on either side of the House in favour of taking the land fund, and no doubt there was a majority in favour of doing so, I did not feel justified in making such a large and important change as this without laying it before the constituencies. I believe that the idea is ingrained in the minds of the constituencies here that the land fund belongs to us, but I believe also that such inroads have been made upon it that wo shall find it all gone without anything having been done to settle the question finally. Therefore I think there should be an amendment in the direction of local receivers paying over to local districts a proportion of the revenue raised therein, instead of paying it into the consolidated fund. I disapprove also of the 20 per cent, paid to the counties on account of land sales, and proportionate to rates raised. Under this arrangement we shall have counties with no interest at all in the land fund. I have always looked upon the land fund as the property of the districts, and look upon it that suburban districts such as this, which has main roads over which t raflic passes, is entitled to a share of the land fund. I take it that a great injustice is done by this arrangement to populous districts whose roads have been made, and which are still used for the benefit of people beyond in the outlying districts. There is one question which agitated the members of the Assembly very much during last session, and I regret that through being in Canterbury I was absent during its discussion. That is the taxation of the future. I will tell you now shortly my views on the subject of'taxation. I have a very strong idea that, we are very fully taxed now, both locally and by the General Government, and that taxation is not a thing to be increased if it can possibly be avoided. lam also strongly of opinion that to increase taxation for political purposes is wrong. It should only be imposed for revenue purposes, and where it is imposed it should be in the fairest way, and over all those deriving the benefit of Government. Now the general drift of Sir George Grey’s proposals regarding the change of ihe incidence of taxation, is this. He proposes to take off to some extent the taxation on necessaries of life, and put it on to property. The proposal is, I believe, to take some £IIOO,OOO off the Customs, and to put it on to property. I venture to think that in our present state of finance, with nearly a million annually to pay to outside creditors, that we are in no position to remit fixation. I think that further taxation is imminent, certainly looming at no great distance, if the affairs of the colony are not administered more economically than in the past. I do not think that any one with any sense of responsibility upon him can go in for losing the taxation which we indirectly obtain through the Customs revenue. Of some £1,200,000 received for Customs revenue, some £600.000 is raised from the consumption of tobacco, wines, spirits, Ac., the remainder, with the exception of that on articles of clothing, Ac., is derived from the use of the necessaries of life. I think when we come to examine this, and to talk as to how it acts on the working-man, we shall hesitate before we lose our hold on this revenue. Really it does not affect the working-man more than between Ad or Id per day per head. I don’t think it is to that extent quite. Further than this, it must be remembered that we have got in this country some 50,000 Maoris, who cost a large sum annually in governing. We have got no hold of them; we get no taxation out of them, except through the means of the Customs revenue. Gentlemen, what I want to ask you is this, are you prepared to give up the hold which you have got on them, and to release this amount of revenue ? Let us now look at the proposal to release the necessaries of life. Take the item of sugar. This is very largely used by brewers, so that we should not by taking the duty off the necessaries of life be doing so solely in the int erests of the working man. I think therefore that we are not in a posit ion—looking at our present financial condition, and what that appears to lie likely to be in the future —to let go so large an amount of revenue as is represented by this part of the Customs duties. Though I should be glad to see a revision of the incidence of taxation, I do not think that the present tariff does press hardly on the working man. On the other hand I think that a serious and decided change would take place in the prosperity of the working man if as proposed we take off this amount of taxation and place it on property. Take the item of clothing for instance. There are large industries established in various parts of the colony in connection with this item. If you take off the tax as proposed these industries must suffer, large numbers of people will be thrown out of work and suffer in respect to these industries only. We all know that petitions largely signed have been sent up from Canterbury saying, “ Give us work ; even if it costs 10 per cent more than to import articles from England, give us work, and we shall be satisfied.” On the whole, so far as I am able to see, I do not think that the present customs duties oppress the working man in full swing of profitable labour. Now then as to the proposal to tax property. I should like to see a tax which would "catch absentee proprietors and also catch large holders of property. It would be very satisfactory to do so, but the question is how to impose a tax so as to deal fairly with all classes at the same time that you effect this. You can’t impose a tax to catch the classes of persons I have referred to but which will not be hard upon the small holders of land in such districts as this. If you tax land it must be done on some definite principle. If it is to be on improvement in value consequent upon construction and extension of railways, then there must be a classification of taxation. This has been provided for in Mr Ormond’s District Railways Bill. 1 hold generally that if fresh taxation is to be put on laud—'which no doubt will come—all other properties should bear their fair share, no more and no less. The question is a very complicated and difficult one, and as I said before 1 don’t think we should rush into taxation which would deter capitalists from investing in the country— [cheers]— and _it will be a very bad day when we frighten industries from here. [Cheers.] We have a large amount of local taxation at present, besides stamp duty, which reaches some £IIB,OOO psr year, which is a tax upon property now.

These, gentlemen, are my views upon taxation ; but if I have not made myself sufficiently clear to you, I shall bo glad to answer any questions you may desire to put. Another feature of Sir George Grey’s policy is manhood suffrage. I don’t know exactly what t his is to be, unless it is to take the same shape as the miners’ right qualification, and that every one carrying round a piece of paper will bo entitled to a vote. If this is so, then I say I don’t want to see it here. At present there is no industrious man resident for a certain length of time in any locality but can have his vote for his election of representatives. Therefore I think there is a good deal of —well, I was going to say claptrap —in this cry, because there is no necessity for it. The franchise as it exists is not objected to now, and if people will only take the trouble of registering—which is, after all, not much trouble now—there is no difficulty in any industrious man getting a vote. I admit that there is one thing which it is necessary we should have, and that is a simpler form of registration. [Hear, hear.] I will say one thing here, that when the re-

vision of the franchise comes on I shall be one who does not think that the miners have any right to expect the continuance of an especial franchise; and as regards the Maoris until they exercise their rights as citizens they have no right to expect the franchise. I desire to see them brought under the same laws as the English people, and I want to see them register as English people do, and get their votes. Ido not. think it would be desirable under present circumstances to change the arrangements for the election of Maori members, but I shall not vote in the direction of an increase of their number as proposed. In the North Island the Maoris have a large voice in the election of members generally, and I am glad to see it, as I want to see them come in the same as other citizens. So far as we can see, it is proposed that we are to have representation on the basis of population. It would be premature for me now, with no details before me, to indicate precisely what line I should adopt with regard to this; but, gentlemen, I may say that I see that representation on this basis would throw the preponderance of power into the hands of towns. Gentlemen, there are other interna wbieb to be considered, and their claims should enter very largely into the consuK-ratieu oi this question.” The speaker then explained his views regarding the Counties Act, his objections to Resident Ministers, his opinion on Civil Service reform, and other matters, and answered a number of questions. Mr H. Matson moved —“ That a vote of confidence be accorded to Mr Rolleston, and that this meeting expresses a hope that he will look after the interests of the district as well in the future as he has done in the past.” [Cheers.] Mr Langdale seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously. Mr Rolleston returned thanks, and the meeting broke up. MR FITZROY AT LEESTON. Mr Fitzroy met the electors of the Ellesmere district at the Leeston Town Hall on Saturday night. There was not a large attendance. Mr Fitzroy addressed the meeting at some length on the legislation of last session and the part lie took in the business of the House. At the close of the address, Mr. McLachlan had much pleasure in proposing a vote of thanks to Mr Fitzroy for his address, and he hoped to see him again. He trusted that in the event of that gentleman receiving a request from the majority of the electors, at least six weeks before the next meeting of Parliament, that he would forward his resignation to the proper authorities. Mr Barnett seconded the vote of thanks. Mr Gammack moved as an amendment—- “ That Mr Fitzroy be thanked for his address, and that he be requested to send in his resignation at Ids earliest convenience.” Mr Cunningham seconded the amendment. On the amendment being put to the meeting eight voted for and eleven against it, many persons in the hall not voting, The amendment was declared to be lost, and the resolution carried.

Mr Fitzroy thanked the meeting for their vote, and after the customary compliment had been passed to the chairman the meeting broke up at a late hour.