OUR REPRESENTATIVES.

Lyttelton Times, Volume VI, Issue 403, 13 September 1856, Page 3

OUR REPRESENTATIVES.

[From a letter in the Wellington Independent, with the signature of " a Stranger in the Gallery," we extract the following amusing descriptions, without any apology, feeling sure that each hon. gentleman will so enjoy the comments on his fellow member a3 to forget the " breach of privilege" in the remarks on himself.] First let me sketch from my seat in the gallery a few of the celebrities of our little Parliament. There's Sewell ;he was the first Prime Minister of the Session, so we will give him the first place in our tableau. You have seen him before, with his broad square head, his goodnatured practical face, his little legs, and the suit of solemn black with which he disguises himself into the exact resemblance of a Portugal street attorney —not that I would insinuate any other similitude between the two. He snuffs like a Scotchman, and not unfjequently he will break off in the middle of a speech, and on finding the three boxes before him all empty, will cross the House to where sits Dr. Lee, to borrow his bos for the rest of the day. He is a pleasant level persuasive speaker, but apt to be too diffuse —-his three hours speech might have been condensed with advantage into an hour—and when not warmed up he has a knack of hesitating and repeating his words which it is painful to listen to. He has a good deal of pugnacity, can hit hard, and can take punishment with good humour—a sure sign of pluck, and one which is sadly wanting in his present colleague Stafford. He is very adroit in debate —and quick at reply—though not always honest in stating the arguments of an opponent — indeed no member "was oftener stopped for misrepresentation in this way than he was. The great defect of his mind seems to be an incapacity to adopt a decided course —always endeavouring to split the difference, as Fitzherbert said of him "he seems to have been born a bankruptcy lawyer, whose business is to induce men to accept ten shillings in the pound." Serious as such a mental defect is in discussion, it must be far worse in practice.

At the commencement of the Session. Sewell attempted to carry things with a very high, hand. His tonfe while enunciating his policy in the celehrated three hours speech was dictatorial in the highest degree. He had evidently not calculated on the strength of his opponents — had probablybeen led to expect, as I had, that your. Wellington leaders were mere hustings orators, who couldnot grapple with him in close debate. After he had experience of what Carleton calls their " long tongue and sharp tooth," and been twice defeated at their hands in the pitched battles of the Session, he sung homeopathically smaller, and towards its close he " drew it 'very mild" indeed. Not only in debate, but in every way his pretensions decreased. At the beginning of the Session it was understood that Sewell would take no office but the highest, subsequently he consented to play the second fiddle to Stafford, who is every way, and infinitely, his inferior. Indeed there is no doubt that Sewell is out and out the best man of party, far superior even to Whittaker, though the latter seems to have thrown his lasso over his head, and pulled the wool over his eyes, pretty effectually in many respects, particularly on . the question of native management, on which I shall have more to say in a future letter.

Swell's "colleague in the House of Representatives in the first Ministry was Bell. This gentleman did not seem to the gallery to be cutout for a leader.. He is a pleasant speaker, w iyx a nice voice, a good looking but rather a girlish faee a and altogether more of the carpet knigLt than the hero of the trenches, or the combatant ia the "'body to body tight." _ His speeches, though fluent,and agreeable in delivery, have very little in them—nothing that leaves an impression—nothing for an opponent to reply to—their insipidity is "proved by the fact that

the paper on his own side never reported him, even while he was a Minister." He spoke pretty often and once or twice at a tedious length; though I cannot charge liim with having unduly occupied the attention of the House, considering his position in it and his standing in the Colony. lam told he is a good official— as a statesman and a member he certainly cannot be ranked above a very moderate mediocrity. That honorable member sitting with knitted brow in sm easy chair, in the dark comer near the Speaker, making notes and crying hear, hear, in a very decided manner, is Pox, the member for Wanganui. He is Saxon, if you judge by his square frame, his fair hair and grey eyes-— Yankee by his perpendicular countenance, sharp acquiline nose, thin compressed lips, and the opinions to which the latter give utterance. He was one of the most popular speakers with the gallery—perhaps a little too fond of addressing himself to it. His forte is the earnestness with which he throws himself into debate —the . right good will with which he pitches into his ox>ponents. When warmed up he is very fluent —but terse and epigrammatic withal—and though he spoke very often, he never bored the House by speaking without having something to say. or remaining longer on his legs than till he had. said it. His chief defect as a leader is his pugnacity and want of conciliation. If a member so much as sits on the side of his opponents he can't keep his hands off him. Even if an opponent has as little to say and says it as feebly as Valentine Smith, or Curtis, of Kelson, he would find something to lay hold of as a lever, and send the unfortunate flying, amidst the laughter and cheers of the House. I have no doubt he lost supporters by this—though on the other hand his plain out speaking rallied the best and most sterling' men around him. In the early part of the Session one. or two. members who did not know him. were foolish enough to try his mettle by attacking him on the subject of his six colonies —Williamson of the New ZeaUtnder was one of them—but he caught such a retort as shut him up " like an oyster," and effectually prevented his trying it on again, while it operated as a wholesome caution to others. Indeed there were few who took much by their motion, when they tried to pick up the honorable member for Wanganui, and if he was at hand he was certainly feared by his oppo* nents. I hear he talks of resigning on account of the Assembly being summoned at Auckland again. If he does, the gallery will lose oife of its chief favorites, and no body regrets it more then your humble servant.

That other gentleman with .-Saxon, face and hair, hut without the Yankee perpe.ndicularitj', is John Hall of Canterbury, Fox's Colonial Secretary. He lias quite a boyish look, though I am told he is older than he appears. He is a very neat and earnest speaker, not pretending to eloquence, but always to the purpose, always' clear, and always decided. He has an intense sense of justice—always ready to. champion the oppressed. I have no doubt that at school he had a perpetual black eye from fighting the-bat ties of the small boys against the big ones who bullied them.-. He hus unquestionably summoned countless cabmen for cruelty towards horses—and signed petitions without end against the barbarism of dog carriages. He exhibited a very considerable knowledge of business, and no member in the house came better prepared as to facts, though his'speaking was evidently unpremeditated. I thought his speech on Sewell's policy one of the best delivered in the Hottss during the session ; it gave him at once a position and a weight which he did not lose. Mr. Hall, in common with the other Canterbury members, lias an awkward trick of rising on his toes when speaking, with a sort of jerk, as if he were pulling up his words with a string. It is probably a habit acquired by straining on tiptoe to spy out their sheep on the vast level plain they inhabit. It is, however, an inelc-gancy, and I recommend Mr, Hall and his colleagues to omit this Terpsichoreah exercise, when next they exhibit on the floor of the House. However, on the whole, Hall is one of the best speakers and one of themes': useful and industrious members, and must fill a prominent place in any iuture session. The Colonial Treasurer in Fox's ministry was. Charles Brown, the Superintendent of T;-,rana'ki. A g«od deal was expected from this gentleman, but the gallery thought he did not answer-the whip, when his time came. He is a poor speaker, entirely wanting in fluency and force, and not overburdeued with ideas. His forte is a certain seif reliance, not seldom amounting to obstinacy. He is fearless and inclined to lake a course of his own—but not always judicious in the coum* he takef. Jvcw we have aniveii at Stiii'iird I have taken my suiers in the order of their Hiiuistrk-s, what shall

1 say of him? Prejudiced in his favour at the commencement of the session, I confess I was greatly disappointed with him before its close—and that, whether I considered him as a statesman, or an orator. With great assumption of superior wisdom, (which imposes on one at first) he is really shallow and empty to a degree—ignorant of the first principles of government and of the commonest routine of business. There is an immense amount of—what shall I call it —about him—coxcombry, is too mild a word —shall I say snobbishness? I fear na.other word will express what I mean." He attitudinizes— sticks his hand in his bosom—puts his leg in position : —and with a voice which if left to nature would not be inharmonious, he gutturalizes as if he was speaking from the depth of his boots. ItealJy frivolous, he apes solemnity—he lectures —nay positively preaches—an impertinence which neither individual members, nor the house as a whole will ever long tolerate.. When he failed to form a ministry on Sewell's second defeat, his explanatory speech was the most awful piece of prating I ever listened to. His oration on the capture of Sebaslopol would have gained his first prize at the midsummer examination of any classical and commercial academy I for the education of.young gentlemen—but would hardly' have passed muster in a lawyer's clerks' debating society. In the earlier part of the session Stafford spoke little ; after he took office he wasted much of the time of the House—chiefly by speaking on questions where no opposition was offered—and by replying to speakers whom he had not listened to. In short, he reminded me a good deal of what Punch says of his countrymen, that 'an Irishman will drink any kind of whiskey so long as it is whiskey, and will talk any nonsense so long as he can hear himself talk.' Stafford is an Irishman, I believe, though without the brogue. Se^vell I have already described. That gentleman at the ministerial table next to him, is Dr. Campbell, our Superintendent. I cannot think that his friends did wisely when they plunged him into politics. He is an amiable gentleman, and what is more, the best dressed man in the house, though it would be as well if, when he has hung up his hat on the pec behind his seat, he would not comb out his long hair with his fingers, like a young counter jumper when he goes into church. I can't describe his speaking, for he doesn't speak. Overwhelmed with maiden coyness, blushing to the roots of his hair and his finger's ends, he gets up, and in some foreign language (t am told it is Scotch), he stutters out a^dozen words, and then suddenly collapses like a tattered ballon, looking as if he felt he had done the foolish thing, and that the eyes of all Europe were upon him. :It used to set me. a moralizing when I saw Campbell sitting at thi ministerial table. I confess I did not think it was • the right man in the right place.' However, I suppose property, as.well as talent, is entitled to representation; and tf not useful he is at least a highly, ornamental supplement to the ministerial phalanx. That pale man with the lantern jaws who has thrust his legs too far through his trousers, sitting next to Campbell, is Richmond the Colonial Secre r tary. Cut out fora Chancery lawyer, and I believe a very good one, he exhibits but little of the scope of mind and largeness of thought necessary to make a good legislator in a new community, where a knowledge of anatomy of society, rather than an acquaintance with its feudal trappings, is the great requisite. He is a feeble speaker, dwelling on small points, more skilful to evade than to grapple with an argument He is thoroughly truthful, and has faith-in the quibbles he advances. His argument in support of Sewell's ' we,'was a metaphysical treat which might have set Stewart or Reid a thinking for weeks on the idiosyncrasy of his brain. Talking'the most pitiable sophistry, he believed every word he said. His candour was occasionally extremely inconvenient to his colleagues, and I scarcely understand how he and Stafford, who glories in ' dodges,' can get on together. Some passages in the ministerial history of the last month must have gone against Richmond's grain. We hope a' longer acquaintance with official life will not destroy the candour ' of his disposition, which is really at present the very \ieach-down of the ministry. That rather small man in the shooting-jacket is Elliott of Nelson. Though not in the Stafford ministry he is of it, having in fact made it. He is a remarkable instance of the power of the press in a small place. Owning the only newspaper at Nelson, and conducting it with much skill, he has got so much political power in his hands that he can turn the scale of any election in the province. It was his support that made Stafford Superintendent, it will be by a coalition with him that Stafford's successor, whoever he may be, will get his office. It is amusing to see how the Nelson members bow the knee and " hootoo '> to him. See him as with a catlike step he glides across to insinuate an idea info the thick head of that stolid looking Scotchman opposite, who evidently is at a dead loss to give a reanois for the faith that is in him. Even Stafford himself dances to his piping, heading the troupe of obedient, performers who exhibit on their hind legs when he shakes his little whip. He seldom speaks, and makes liitfe impression when he does—partly because there is little matter in his speeches, and

partly because he makes dreadful havoc with the Queen's English. It is ear-splitting to hear him dropping his h's where he ought to take them up, and taking them hup where he" bought to let them alone. He talks of " happrehending " something about the "ouse," and hotherwise hexpresses his-self in a lielegant manner. Stafford's prospects as Prime Minister depend entirely Upon Elliott'.being able to keep his little knot of Nelson voters together. As long as he can do so, a combination with Auckland will always make him secure. Another newspaper at Nelson would probably make the difference. The place must be large enough by this time to support another.

Another- editorial member and leader of a party who has gained his position chiefly by the possession of a newspaper, is Carleton, member for the Bay of Islands—he is very little qualified to be a public leader—liia mind being one of that class which shuns the light—working underground, like moles and like bats only able to see in obscurity. Diplomacy he conceives to be his forte, and he carries it on as Pyramus r.nd Thisbe did their love, through the chinks in a wall or the gaps in a pa'ing. At public meetings, on platforms, and other day-light occasions," lie is never " to the fore," knowing well that his forte is not in that direction. He avows himself a high conservative, and a wholesale worshiper of ".birth and bjood "—his own pedigree going back to the barbarians. Though he heads, what we call our progress party, his.sympathies are all opposed .to what we call popular government, and it is doubtful whether in joining a popularl movement it is not for the express purpose of retarding its advance. He has no oratorical ability, delivers himself with difficulty; dogmatically and epigraminatically, generally finishing his little explosion with a ghastly grin, and a twist of his Californian-cut beard, which might make him a fortune as pantaloon at Astlej's. He is chairman of committees—an office which he fills pretty well,' though too fond of exhibiting his knowledge of the technicalities of the Standing Orders, and not manifesting that courtesy of manner which distinguishes "Mr. Speaker." Tne contrast between the two was very marked, during the illness of. the latter, when the former filled the Speaker's chair for a {fortnight. The .acerbity- with which he called honourable members to order for reading a newspaper, or crossing in front of a speaker, and his attorney-like interpretation of the standing Orders, though meant-to secure order, had exactly the reverse effect, and 'showed how judicious is the courteous indulgence with which Clifford rules the house. Another editor is "Williamson, of the 'New Zealander,' an Irishman, of some very businesslike ability, but a very middling talker, lie-heads the Auckland minority in the house—consisting of Dr. Lee, (who like Mr. Elliott, has the misfortune to misplace his h's), and whose ," few remarks '■' seldom occupy the attention of the "ouse " for more than a few seconds, Merriman,. a'bumptious lawyer, who was chairman of committees last session, but who seldom speaks, except to pick up Carleton on points of order; and Greenwood, the brigade-major, who, like /Williamson, represents the pensioner villages. The former is one of the three comic performers of »the house— Brodie of our suburbs, and East of New Plymouth, being the other two. Greenwood does the genteel comedy, Brodie the farce, and East the clown. That sort of thing, howeVer, [requires to be kept within very narrow bounds, and unfortunately none of the three had the taste to perceive that their performances were neither creditable to. the house, nor appreciated in the dress circle.

Another class of'members who may be enumerated in one category, were the '.' dumb dogs who couldn't bark"—"the chips in porridge" —the empty vessels who would if they could, but didn't because they couldn't. Such were Charles Taylor, our Laud ' Commissioner; Wells, of Nelson; Brittin of Canterbury; Valentine Smith, of your settlement, and one or two more. I cannot congratulate you on the last named ; he was the only Wellington man who didn't seem to have something to recommend him. You can't surely have got through all your presentable men. Did seven members exhaust all the brain, all the oratory, all the sense o£ Wellington, that you were obliged to send this Mr. Smith ? Or did you do it by way of foil ? There was no occasion for that, I assure you; there were "sticks" enough in the house from other quai ters to have served the purpose ! you might havti left Mr. V. Smith to the enjoyment of private life, and avoi.led the supposition'that your stock of notabilities is exhausted by seven draughts. ■Of Feathcrston and Fitzherbert I need say little, as you know them well enough. The former seldom spoke—suffering: apparently trom illness —and being always in pain and difficulty when he did speak. He never took part in the thick of the debate, but he made three of the best didactic and and argumentative speeches I ever heard ; particularly his last on Ihe Stafford finance policy, which exhausted the whole question, and was never answered. Fitzherbert spoke very /unequally* not always consulting the patience of the House;

1 but he. always spoke instruct!vely, r and in his, hap-, »! pier efforts was most felicitous. His speech on the % night when the Fox ministry went out was the best « speech delivered during the session—polished, clas-. * bical', sententious, and cutliugly, sarcastic;-— exhibiting both the gentleman and the scholar. His great fortes are illustration and sarcasm ; the latter the most cutting I ever listened to. He is a great actor too.though he never condescends to buffoonery ; and, as Richmond: said one night, he could only be properly reported by an Illustrated News, or Pictr orial. Times. ■ Another of your members is Ward, —I.as tall & man,as any in Illyria;"—certainly the tallest, man. in the House. It is. difficult to say to which side of the House he belongs; because if his body is on one his legs must necessarily be on the other. However, there was never any doubt as to which side he voted on, —he stuck to Wellington through thick and thin—good report and evil report. During the first two months of the session he never spoke at. all,, and we began to think him "a- muff," but one fine day he woke up from the chair in which he was sleeping behind the Speaker, drew himself out like , a telescope, walked up to the table and delivered a capital speech on the Marriage Amendment Bill,— r not a bad subject for a maiden speech,—kept the House in a shout of laughter, and then quietly put himself into his case again. The same day he , came out again, and made a good business-like speech on some ]p<v bill; the result of the two speeches being to give him. a good standing in the House from that time forth. He showed good plucfj^tter in the session, in a row with Carle ton, who Tiad better have let him alone, and indeed, took good care to do so afterwards—which is more than '" I suspect the young ladies in your province will do, ' after his depriving them of their " privileges'' by his Marriage Act. Domett, though a Wellington man, is a Nelson member. He came up with a great prestige—was ' looked on as the leader of old officialism, "no ministry could be formed without him," indeed * there were those who thought that under his and Bell's auspices the Government of the colony was to be handed back again, to the old Grey nominees, however he made a dead failure —delivered one third-rate speech on the Sewell policy, and then for the rest of the session contented himself with what J Fox called the dumb eloquence of "no no," and ' " hear hear." His tone, of mind seems unsuited to popular government, and he is too honest to pretend to like what he hates. Those who know him say he has " lots in him"—but the " lots" are of the wrong sort, or he cannot bring them out. Well, these are nearly all. There were a few more; as Cuff of Akaroa, apparently an honest -■ John Bull, but not gifted with speech—Beckham who wonld cutout Campbell as the "best dressed - man," if he wouldn't have his " things" made so -tight, and wouldn't "titivate" his whiskers quite so much. Henderson who I suspect knows a good deal more than he says; and" Graham who is a shrewd Scotchman, and could speak if he would. There is Daldy, who was a member of Fox's Executive, a plain spoken sensible member with a good knowledge of commerce and the natives, and who, with Henderson and Graham, stuck to. Fox when the rest of the Auckland men went over to Stafford. And finally, there are the two Cargills and Mac Andrew from Otago—three as shrewd Caledonians as ever supped brose, or ate porridge with «i horn spoon The elder Cargill is pretty nearly ' Worked out, but occasionally shows vestiges of the ; precious metal, the other two without any preten--j sums to oratory and seldom addressing the House, f did so occasionally with no little effect. Indeed, were it not for the Scotch dialect, and a certain ' ungainliness of manner, Mac Andrew and John GttwjjU would be two as effective speakers as any in the Hbuse—they have both a great deal of humour —both an abundance of practical good sense—and both are thoroughly imbued with liberal views. Mac-Andrew did good service with his Bank Bills— 1 though thwarted by Sewell and not able to carry ' all he wanted.