Spirit of the Press.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume 6, Issue 307, 18 September 1865, Page 1

Spirit of the Press.

... NEW ZEALAND POLITICS. *' > [From the Tress, September 5.] Political affairs in Now .Zealand seem to Lave run.in a singular kind of cycle. A Constitution was granted to the colony, and representative institutions established In 1854, when the first responsible Government was formed by Mr Fitz Gerald, in company with Air Weld and Mr Sewell, But that was only the first beginning of the principle of government ; many years had to pass away before it attained its full growth." The colony was not then allowed to exercise any control over matters involving what were called Imperial interests, and foremost among these, and a matter in which "colonial interference was regarded" with special - jealousy by the Home Government, was 'the charge and government Of the aboriginal population. The power of the Crown, by a curious fiction, had in those days come to be regarded as the only thing which stood between the inoffensive helplessness of the Natives and" the rapacity of the greedy unscrupulous settlers, while the colonists, though chafing under the unmerited imputation, were well content to surrender so troublesome a duty as the management of the Natives into any hands that were willing to undertake it. But as time wore on, as the country became more and more settled and the colony bega n rapidly to grow into a powerful English community, it became evident that the Home Government had undertaken what it had not the means of carrying out; because it was impossible to carry on the government of the Natives as a thing apart from that of Europeans ; the two were continually crossing and clashing against each other, and the evils of what began to be called the double government grew every year less endurable. At last the Home Government could no longer conceal from themselves the fact that their endeavour to govern the Natives bad been a failure, and determined- on acceding to the request of the colonists that they would resign all responsibility innative affairs into thehandsof tlie Colonial Government. The colonists, rather startled by the facility with which they obtained the desired boon, showed no very eager anxiety to .accept it, but. the.Home,authorities, having made up. their, numis to rid themselves of so troublesome a task,, were imperative, and the transfer/of. responsibility was accordingly effected.,. The came the triumph of the war party, who joyfully assumed the direction of affairs, and hastened to carry their vaunted schemes of rigorous government into practical operation. We need not record their votes; the country is still groaning under the burdens Imposed upon it by their abortive projects and worsethan useless expenditure. But meanwhile the theory of colonial responsibility remained only-a theory. The whole plan of, the Fox-Whitaker administration was based upon the active assistance, ‘of a large detachment . of the British .army, that, is, tipon the approval of the British.Gdyernm.ent and people, who were not lively to allow the mother country to be reduced, as Mr Cardwell put it, ‘‘simply, to be a" tributary nation, affording,at its own cost the means of carrying into effect the policy of the, colonial ministers, without expressing any voice in the direction of that policy.”; If the Colonial Government chose "to adopt a policy which could nbt.be carried out without the willing co-operation of the home country, and would be put a stop to, at any moment if England declined her assistance, it is obvious that so long as that State of things continued, the responsibility lay not with" the Colonial,, but the English Government., : That difficulty! hits now . been removed/; Ne'w Zealand lias at last found a Government, strong enough and.,courageous, enough to take Upon itself tlie 'entire 'responsibility of managing /.these islands, and all the. Queen’s subjects, whether Englishmen or Maoris, and that without the assistance of a single.man or a.single shilling from ilienortfiern country. And thus the pri'ncir pie of responsible,government, the,first seed of which. istence, has at length shot up into'Tutf growtli7 and soon, let us hope, will bear abundance of

fruit. It is a little singular that the Govern-. ment by which this result has been accom-s plished is headed by Mr Weld; and includes among its members - Mr Sewelft and Mr FitzGerald, so that the colony has again put itself in the bands of .those under whose guidance it commenced its political career, and the same men under whom the system of self-government was started, are also those by whom it has brought into full fruition..

“VIOLENT OPINIONS.”—“THE POLICY OF SUCCESS.” [From Uie Nelson Colonist, September 5.J ... When a man “constitutionally rash” attempts tempts to be cautious,, or to explain away, and palliate his past conduct, he sometimes exhibits greater rashness in the excess-of his. caution. If we point' once more to the recent speech of the. hbudrable Minister for Native Affairs in illustratVpu of the foregoing proposition, it is because we consider - that the studied utterances of public men who assume t > be 3 leaders' of the people-are the proper themes from which to borrow public lessons,- either of insirriction or warning. Both of these we purpose to gather from two assertions bearing bn moral and political philosophy,made by Mr Fitzgerald when he first addressed the Ho*:se of .Representatives in his new character pf Native Minister,

, In offering certain, personal explanations to the House as to his acceptance of office, Mr Fitzgerald said It is not the part of a Minister to he a partizan. (Hear, hear.) If a man in opposition expresses violent opinions, it is because that out of violent opinions on both sides truth is eliminated (Hear, hear.) At a previous part of his speech, after confessing that the war policy of the Ministry had “not been successful,” he stated, that A policy was not to be judged of by its success or failure.

We look on these quotations as rather melancholy samples of Ministerial thought. They may be. viewed as maxims expressive of a certain personal theory; and both are falacious. If a policy is not to be judged of by its failure or success, by what is it to be estimated ? What standard of judgment remains ? If we say that; a policy is not do be judged by its consequences,; whether good or bad, we say, in -effect that the labors of a chemist, or the work of ah engineer, must not be valued by their results. Or, to descend to more fanailar instances, it is equivalent to saying this—lf a bricklayer build a. wall; which falls downif a carpenter erect, a house which is neither wind nor weather-proof ; if your tailor makes a suit of clothes which are not fit to be worn, —“ Ah, we must not judge of these, men’s work by its success.” ; The policy of a. Government is the, work of a Government. Its plan'is supposed to be sketched out and the details' filled in beforehand, just as‘ an engineer maps out the bridging of a river, or as ' a mercbant balculates tHe condition of home and foreign marketS.and makes his venture on these,calculations.' In the same way a carpenter prepares his building, or" a 'tailor the of his subject,andcuts accordingly. In each of these cases (and they are all samples of 'Vpolicy” or management, or business, in their several walks) the ability of - the artist, 1 -his judgment,*-* forethought; “ policy,” must be measured by , the success or failure of liis" Work. 1 It is the l£w of daily life ;4nd it% especiallWtrue of lhe : scfedcebf Government, althbuglr it true that the common course of events often assists and corrects incapacity \ otherwise, especially in modern colonial Governments, we should Mdi&veb grfekter blunders than thbse whick are ever audanon cropping out. Akin to * tins' shallow reasoning Which argues that GovernmentVpolicy is not to be judged by its success or failure; is the assertion i touching ministerial - partizenship and ", violent opinions.” This,.is very strange doctrine, -and ,Mr i: Fitzgerald is .himself a standing instance of its fallacy. . He tells us tha,t ,l it is not the part of a Minister to be a plirtizSn.” We may admit the principle but it is not easy : to showi its practice among Ministers unless Indeed.-. it be, interpreted * to, mjan that what a inaa.bas abused and viiided for years be turns round and embraces when office invites him, or where a Minister, like

the Vicar .of Bray, goes, the round of the political compass in order that he may continue a Minister. There are specimens of these classes which could be easily pointed out; but after, all, such people are partizansof an intermittent and it may be, of a time-serving description.

But Mr Fitzgerald proves too much. He owns the soft impeachment that in opposition be used “ violent opinions.” Now, “ violent opinions? are the sure offspring of the most objectionable panizanship. Yet Mr Fitzgerald is a Minister ; and what is more remarkable, a Minister in a Government towards whom he has more or less used these violent opinions. Nor is this all. We are told that out of “ violent opinions on both sides” truth is eliminated ; and this is told us in the same moment that.,we are informed that a Minister should be no partizan, yet he is to employ “ violent opinions,” for such opinions are expressed on both sides! This is Hibernian logic-as verdant as the green isle itself, and the best, or worst of it for the colony, is, that is the logic of a “statesmen!”

It is rather humiliating to find a man who professes to be a leader in politics and a teacher of the people through the medium of a newspaper, defending violent opinions and declaring that out of these truth is eliminated. It is a sad and painful thing to read or listen to such doctrine. In all mutters of social importance, in everything affecting the public weal, we have been taught to revere the old-fashioned plan of abjuring violent opinions, aiid to believe that such subjects should be approached and weighed carefully, with calmness, judgment, and discretion. Violent opinions discard these requisites of sound reasoning. They lead to anarchy; just as Mr Fitzgerald himself admits, the violent opinions of the Hau-hans have produced amongst the natives that anarchy and that bloodshed which we all deplore.

It is matter of deep regret that a leading Minister . should show, what one of his present colleagues (Heaven help them as a “ happy family” of opposite natures !) long ago said he displayed—such a great “ want of ballast,” as the three sentences we have quoted incontrovertibly denote. They cannot have the palliation of the hurry of an unpremeditated speech : they are sentiments so distinct and decided that they could not have been uttered by mistake, or without due consideration. And they show such an utter want of the ability to profit by the practical .‘experience of every-day life, that wc can but repeat our regrets that such opioions'should blossom so luxuriantly in a “ ministerial” mind. . If this were a solitary instance of the kind, we should think less of it j but the same fault runs through nearly all Mr Fitzgerald touches, if not theory, business and not dreaming, be the real basis oft the theme. There can be but little to hope from a mind so obscured to sound business, however much rhetorical flourish may give to it a seeming, but fitful brilliancy.

THE PRESS CONTROL BILL. [From the New Zealand Advertiser.] We have before us a Bill intituled “ An Act to Prevent the Printing and Publishing of Books arid Papers by persons not known, and to Regulate in other respects the Publishing of Ne wspapers 'and Books.” It is very remarkable measure, and chiefly so because it is an enactment , worthy of the dark ages, and not of the present time. We regret to say that this Bill has been introduced by the Government. We & re, as our readers know, supporters of the Government, but we by no ineans think Ministers perfect as men or infallible as politicians. On the contrary, we think "they sometimes make mistakes; and we think, moreover, that the introduction of this measure by the Colonial Secretary, into the Legislative Council, was one of the grossent blunders' they have yet made. If a Bill' to gag, the Press were neccessary, it wouldhaveheen more likely to meet with a favourable reception if it had been introduced by one of the Ministers, and received by the sHriufce of Representatives; but coming slyly : ihp nominated’ branch o t the Legislature, which Ainiformly supports the Government of the day, what-

ever may be its merits, and which is not responsible to public opinion, it looks very like ; an attempt to steal a march on the public,. and secure by strategy what would stand no - chance whatever on its merits. We have carefully looked through the Bill, and pronounce it bad in principle andworse in detail. It is wholly- unnecessary;* and, were it to become Jaw, would substantially place the newspaper Press of the Colony under the joint censorship of the Colonial Secretary and Attorney-General for the time being. But although we entertain a high opinion of the gentleman who fill these offices - at present, we can imagine a change of office and the accession to power of politicians less* scrupulous and enlightened. What, then, would be the consequence? Why this: vexstions prosecutions and opposition journals, would follow, and the independence of the Press would be paralysed. ' *

The law, if carried out, would absolutely prohibit the publication of more than a dozen powerful newspapers in the colony. I would convert these (or have a tendency to convert them) into official or semi-official journals and undoubtedly would go far to undermine the> independence of those journals whose monied interest could float them over the monetary obstacles the Bill throws in the way of the . publication of newspapers. Of course, there ‘ would be a sudden re-action. Publications would issue in defiance of the law, and public • i ' clamour would sweep away the legal restric- : tious imposed on the Press. But the permanent effect would be to lower the tone of journalism in New Zealand, which ranks higher, as a r whole, than in any other Australasian Colony. The Bill, once law, would prevent gentle-' men of principle, and high standing from con- k tributing to a Press, the control of which was in the hands of the Government of the s day. And when public indignation would have swept away the control law, these writers would not return. They would riot" lend themselves to a resume of their editorial seats, they would be unable to control the . recklessness which opposition to the press law would infallibly stimulate. . i We need not go into details of this Bill further than to state generally that it will be impossible for any newspaper proprietor to publish a journal without subjecting himself to prosecutions and fines. The liberty of the subject is invaded; and the spy system, so foreign to English jurisprudence, is mainly relied on by. the promoters of the measure to give it effect. The security clauses, taken in connection with the penalty clauses and and the policy of censorship, which runs through the entire msasure, will have the immediate effect of crushing 5 all the struggling newspapers, and especially those in the Gold districts and outlying settlements of the Middle Island; and will effectually bar the establishment of new journals. The policy of recent English legislation is . opposed to the principle of the Bill now under consideration. The discussions in the ' House of Commons on the repeal of .the • Newspaper Stamp Duty, in 1855, abundantly ; proves this: and, we further add, that the ’ security ami registration clauses In the Bill ■ before the New Zealand Parliament are in - direct opposition to the policy of the Itnpe- - rial Parliament, as evidenced in those debates * and the law which gave them practical effect. We say again, we regret extremely the in- ' troduction of this measure by the Govern- ! raent, as it is wholly unnecessary. Let them •; point to a single instance in the Colony in - which the existing law has been ineffectual in its operation—let them point to a single journal, the proprietors of which have evaded the legal consequences of publication, oragainst whom legal damages could not be enforced. They cannot point to'a single in-; stance. As for private printers, these are at' all times amenable to legal proceedings. la ... the recent case of Mr G. 0. Davis, at Auck- *■ land, this has been clearly shown. There;; is, therefore, no possible pretext for this measure, except it be the unscrupulous opposition of the Auckland Press. But who can sup-a pose for ona moment that such a journal as 1 the Daily Southern Cross could be coerced* into support of any by any ,onac|m§nt as thi3 ?.iXhe ideals and we warn the Government that if they* enter into a conflict with the Press at tUia

time of day, and into this Colony, they will toon he taught the lesson that the Colonial Ministry are far from being so influential as the Fourth Estate. We desire to save the Government from committing a gross blunder, when we advise them to drop the measure before challenging the House of Representatives to a hostile vote. They have not gone too far yet; it may soon be too late. In conclusion we may remark that one of the objectionable features of the Bill is this, that it k, proposed to control the Press, through the “great unpaid” Justices of the Peace, and not by putting into motion the machinery of the Supreme Court. The Government make and unmake the Magistrates; and as “justices’justice’” has passed into a proverb to express the contempt of the public lor the administration of justice, and the interpretation ef law, by modern Dogberrys, we can easily imagine bow this contempt would be strengthened by their exercise of the powers placed at their discretion by this Pill.