THE POLICY OF THE FOX MINISTRY.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume 14, Issue 697, 5 July 1869, Page 3

THE POLICY OF THE FOX MINISTRY.

(From the Nelson Examiner, 26th June.) The most interesting question of the moment, as far as the colonists of New Zealand are concerned, is on what principle the Opposition has just outvoted Mr Stafford: the investigation is not without its difficulties, nor its interest, for as a body they have enounced none yet, and, indeed, have given no sign of being, in their corporate capacity, possessed of any principle whatever. They have declared they ha v e no confidence in Mr Stafford's Ministry;—it remains to be seen whether they have not still less in one another, The Lyttelton Times has, indeed, in a recent number put forth a somewhat startling policy—if it can be called policy,—but we can hardly believe it is one on which those Northern members, who voted against Mr Stafford will be prepared to act in unison with his Southern opponents. It is actually proposed by that journal that •' the money required for the actual'protection of such of the North Island settlers as cannot defend themselves, must be raised by special taxes, and not by loan" The italics are our contemporary's, and not our own; and our readers will agree with us that the sentiment is worthy of italics, for from the tenor of the article it is evidently intended

to express that these special taxes should be levied on those unhappy settlers who "cannot defend themselves." A few weeks since we heard of nothing but execration of the selfreliance policy, but here we have selfreliance with a vengeance. We had been assailed for maintaining the doctrine that New Zealand must rely upon herself, chiefly upon the ground that the British Parliament, as at present constituted, is certain to refuse assistance; in fact, that we have nothing but ourselves to rely upon. Our assailants, if they were behind-hand in perceiving the facts of the case, are now far outstripping us in their application : " such of the North Island settlers as cannot defend themselves must," it seems, rely upon themselves; for defence. It is true that portions of Auckland and of Wellington are at present tolerably secure, and that our contemporary's policy may be intended to stop short of the disturbed districts. Unfortunately the Maori policy may be difficult to stop short within the sarae limits. If Taranaki and Hawke's Bay be left to take care of themselves by means of these " special taxes," nothing is more certain than that those districts must be given up. Does the Lyttelton Times believe that Auckland and Wellington members will suppose that in that case Auckland and Wellington will enjoy an immunity from Maori aggression and the " special taxes ?." The area of "special taxation" must speedily be co-extensive with the North Island. Now, if anything be certain in our confused politics it is this, that if a. colonial population be taxed beyond a certain point it will vanish, and that, the New Zealand population of both islands is already taxed pretty nearly up to the vanishing point. If the North Island population is subjected to, " special taxation," in addition to its present burdens, it will inevitably dis* appear. Unfortunately, however, the three million loan will not disappear with it, nor the Northern Provincial debts, for which the South has accepted a joint responsibility. The ultra-self-reliance policy of the Lyt- ' telton Times must eventually leavethe Middle Island to rely upon itself for the interest of that loan (of which, by the way, Mr Fox had the spending of the greater portion, little as it effected), and of those debts. The North Island, which it requires but a little patience to render the richest portion; of the security, will, of course as far as finance is concerned, be reduced to. ' a " geographical expression." But though this proposition is the only one yet announced by the Opposition, it is unworthy of serious consideration. Bound up as this island now is, financially and politically, with the Northern Island, to leave that community to its fate is as though those who had the privileges of the quarter-deck should refuse to concern themselves with a leak in the bows of the vessel (we beg pardon of our local contemporary for another of what he calls our " metaphoric illusions"). We swim or sink together. ! Whatever policy, whatever,

is decided upon, what is more certain than that nothing can extricate New Zealand from her present crisis but the united efforts of her population acting as one iutegral community? Yet this is the moment chosen for preaching the " Sauve quipeut" policy *-~the policy of savages, who are unable to see that all that makes life worth having depends upon the readiness of each section of the community to take its share in exceptional bur dens, though they only directly affect one particular section. Let us be sure that our organization, imperfect as it is, is not yet so low that our community can be severed into two halves to the utter destruction of one, without a thrill being sent throughout every member. We would recommend to the con sideration of the Northern members of the Opposition the consideration of the policy deliberately proposed by their Southern allies, and to its immediate effects upon themselves. The constituencies of the South we would beg to consider what the ultimate eflects of this "Devil-take-the-weakest" policy would be upon them, with their present inextricable financial entanglements with the North. Both alike we invite to weigh the probable effect oi the advocacy of such a policy by a respectable journal upon those timid capitalists whose gold we are seeking in order to secure our existence, and to aid us in developing the resources of one of the noblest and most valuable countries in which civilized man has yet taken up hi 3 abode.