THE GLOBE. SATURDAY, JULY 10, 1880.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 1990, 10 July 1880, Page 2

THE GLOBE. SATURDAY, JULY 10, 1880.

The motion of the Hon. J. T. Peacock with reference to tho Honorarium of Legislative councillors, naturally at this crisis has created some excitement. In effect it says:—Prune away the salaries of underpaid telegraph and postal employees, reduce the honorarium of the Lower House, but do not daro to lay a sacriligeous finger on tho money paid by a grateful country to its Lords. Now it seems to us that such a proposition at tho present juncture of affairs is simply monstrous. Tho country has been called upon to make sacrifices to atone for past extravagances. Every branch of tho service will have to suffer reductions to tho lowest limit consistent with efficiency. Why, then, should legislative councillors refuse to take their fair share of tho retrenchment. They are almost to a man possessed of ample means, and to them the honorarium, as such, is of no great moment. But the honorarium, when aggregated, means a great deal to tho already overburdened taxpayer. Under such circumstances wo are surprised that one of their number should have been found to come forward, and by this motion enter a protest against the members of tho Council making an equal sacrifice with others for tho general welfare of the colony. Unlike the members of the Lower House they have no expensive contested elections to provide for, nor are they met with the thousand and one calls upon tho purse that “ our member” has to boar. They travel free upon the railways, and generally life is made as pleasant for thoi-n at the public expense as possible. It does therefore seem somewhat of an anomaly to find ono of them the first to cry out when tho necessity for retrenchment comes home to them. They can apparently adduce no solid argument why they should not share in the general catting down of salaries. With regard to the members of tho House of Representatives the case is different. The latter may argue that if a less sum than at present is given to them, be paid as a honorarium, the choice of the people will ho restricted to the richer classes, and that no purely working man’s candidate will be able to enter the House. But the members of tho Upper House are, as a rule, taken from the more wealthy section of tho community, and the people have nothing whatsover to do with their elevation into that calm elysium where the storms of popular passion blow not, and where a perpetual political summer reigns. We feel confident that the bulk of the Legislative Councillors are not in accord with the Hon. J. T. Peacock, and that possibly a rather warm time is in store for him when the affair comes on to bo discussed. But we cannot help feeling sorry that the motion should have proceeded from a Canterbury man. There exists in both Houses the tradition of a typical, and bloated Canterbury aristocrat. Much as the typical Englishman in the French prints is always selling his wife at Smithfield, and much as tho typical Frenchman in English prints is always swallowing frogs holus-bolus, so the traditional Canterbury millionaire in the New Zealand Parliament sits aloof on his particular seat, with his pockets bulging with bank notes, gridironing in fancy whole counties, and totally oblivious to the general welfare of the country as long as his own interests are not touched. The North Island members, in particular, still thoroughly believe in this traditional creature, and will no doubt be considerably pleased at Mr. Peacock’s motion, as indicating that their theory is a totally correct one. It may, however, bo confidently asserted that Mr. Peacock is a lusus natural, and not a fair representative of the Canterbury contingent of the class to which he belongs.