THE GLOBE. WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 30 1881. MR. S.P. ANDREWS.

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 2390, 30 November 1881, Page 3

THE GLOBE. WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 30 1881. MR. S.P. ANDREWS.

It is a great pity that Mr. Andrews ever appears on a public platform. The sight of a miscellaneous audience seems to affect him in a very extraordinary manner. The worst side of his nature crops up in a way which is not encouraging, and persons who have followed his career with any degree of interest are apt to ask where his love of fair play has departed, and what has become of bis reasoning faculties. Now Mr. Andrews in the House is altogether a different creature. Even during the last session ho was moderately subdued, and there was no occasion for him to be severely snubbed more than three or four times. In the matter of the railway employees, in that of a case against the visiting justices of Dunedin gaol and Captain Hume, and in a few other matters he certainly received rather a “ dressing,” but as a whole his conduct was. with one exception to which wo shall refer later, well suited to a gentleman possessed of no very brilliant parts. As to tho two previous sessions he was positively more or loss of an example to many a man on his side of the House. Possibly the knowledge that tho “ end was not yet” allowed him during the sessions of 1879 and 1880 to take things more quietly, and his slightly more refractory conduct during 1881 may ho traced to the feeling that ere long he would he once more on the stump as the “ working man’s candidate.” In the House Mr. Andrews supports liberal measures with tolerable fidelity ; on the •stump he rails against tho very politicians jwho have passed those measures. While reading a good part of Hansard one would imagine that ho was a Government supporter; to read his platform speeches one would fancy that tho Hall Ministry were tho incarnation of evil. It is this singular discrepancy between Mr, Andrews’ platform utterances and Ms acta in Parliament to which wo object most strongly. It would seem as if his instincts are better than his principles ; as if he were incapable of resisting the temptation to play the small part of Thersites when ha can gain a little cheap applause by doing so. For this reason we say ho is “ not the man for Galway,” and we trust that the electors of Christchurch North will, on the polling day, show that they admire consistency and candor more than they do a few clap-trap phrases that lower the dignity of the man who utters them. The men we want for members are men who can be depended on to speak fearlessly before their constituents, as well as sensibly in the House, and Mr. Andrews is not one of these, inasmuch as a public meeting unnerves him, and his moral barometer falls with a rapidity truly startling. But dropping now this general charge, let us see what Mr. Andrews has been about during the last three sessions, merely premising that there is nothing very startling to relate, for when off the stump he settles down into a commonplace politician with remarkably little influence either for good or bad. Mr. Andrews gave ns a general sketch of his career as member, in his speech in the Oddfellows’ Hall last month. He was sent up to Parliament in 1879, and he notices as his main feat during that session that he opposed the property tax, which he did not consider a liberal measure. Although our candidate is always more or leas hazy on financial matters, we cannot refrain from wondering what his views on the proper mode of raising revenue may have happened to have been in 1879. He ■evidently did not think much of the land tax, for in his maiden speech in the House, he said, “ It is my own impression and that of my constituents that the present is not a satisfactory or an equitable system of taxation.” Were we to ask his opinion at the present time, no doubt Mr. Andrews would plump heavily for an overwhelming tariff to make up all deficiencies; but in 1879, as Ms advanced protectionist views had not developed themselves, it would he interesting to ascertain what his financial ideas were •at that time, or if he indeed had any at all. Possibly Mr. Andrews’ views on taxation may be summed up by what he said once in the House. It was this : “ I should be glad if we could do away with taxation altogether, and if we could have a free country and a free ran in the way of trade.” No doubt he would, and so would everybody else; hut such views are hardly to the point. Mr. Andrews may consider them eminently liberal, but they are hardly practical. The other measures of importance that were passed in 1879 were, Mr. Andrews tells ns, the Qualification of Electors Bill, tho Registration of Electors Bill, and the Trienmal Parliaments Bill. All these he supported, and ho might just as well give to the Government the credit duo for passing them. He, however, says that they were simply placed on the Statute Book because they had been “ agitated •for during many years.” If that was the ■ only motive power, why were they not placed on the Statute Book when Sir ■George Grey, with a largo majority at his ■hack, was in power P

About the session of 1880 Mr. Andrews tells ns but little. Although the Election Petitions Bill and other liberal measures were passed, yet the measure that appears principally to have,agitated Mr. Andrews’ mind was the Deceased Wife’s Sister Bill. Lightly touching 'this subject and no other, Mr. Andrews passes on the session of 1881, when he is again seen supporting the ■Government in sending through the mill ■several radical measures of reform. Daring ■the pacsage of the Representation Bill, however, Mr. Andrews takes a very peculiar course, and one calculated net to heighten the general opinion of his abilities. For some abstruse reason, best known to himself, ho thought it compatible with his character as a working man’s representative to declare that votes should be given to the Maoris in the North Island. Possibly the influence of Sir George Grey had a good deal to do in the matter. Anyhow, Mr. Andrews never appears to have worked out the problem. How, if the Natives, although burdened with no responsibilities whatsoever, wore to possess the franchise like Europeans, was the working man of Canterbury to have his due weight in the government of the country ? Now it is to be noted that only twice did Mr. Andrews seriously differ from the general programme laid down in respect to the series of reform measures passed by the present Ministry daring the last three sessions, and these two occasions were when the Property To* Bill and the Representation Bill

were under consideration. And on both of these occasions Mr. Andrews was seriously in the wrong. The property tax has been a decided success, and has been proved to do anything but favor the rich man. The idea taken up by our representative in connection with the Representation Bill, was absurd and illogical. In point of fact, during 1879, 1880, and 1881, Mr. Andrews has been a Government man when ho has not been hopelessly floundering. And yet on the public platform ho is totally unwilling to give the Ministry the slightest credit for anything whatsoever. He reels off the well worn sentences so peculiar to his tribe with a glibness that a man with no past to talk of might envy. We totally object to this sort of thing. There should be continuity in the action of all public men. Wo cannot trust them unless there is.