Correspondence.

Lyttelton Times, Volume VI, Issue 414, 22 October 1856, Page 5

Correspondence.

To Hie Editor of ike " Li/ttellon Times."

Sir, —I do not think that you have chosen an opportune moment for broaching the question of nominated Superintendents. The eve of a contested election appears to me to be exactly the time when the jmblic is least likely to take a calm and dispassionate view of so novel and startling a theory. Besides this, the manner in which the discussion was raised seems to me to have been no less unfortunate. I mean that there is that degree of vagueness and want of precision in your statement of the ease, and of the objects which, you seek to efleefc by the proposed changes, which leaves the mind in a state of uncertainty as to the form which the Government would assume in case yoxir ideas were carried out, and as to the evils in our present system which yon propose thereby to remedy.

3STo\v, in my opinion, any change in our present constitution ought to have three principal objects in view : —

Ist. To obtain such a form of Government

for the colony as a whole as will prevent, so far as this is possible, conflict and confusion.

2nd. To adapt the administration of Government to the peculiar wants of each locality, and

t'l'dly. To combine efficiency with cheapness in the Government of the colony. Our form of Government, as at present carried out, appears to me to be ingeniously deficient in all these requisites. The legislative and administrative powers of the different provinces are exercised in a manner calculated to produce conflict and antagonism, both with each other, and with the General Government. While our institutions are thus varied and diversified, this variety and diversity docs not promote, by one jot, their adaptation to local wants; and with all these deficiencies our Government is enormously expensive—probably one of the most expensive in the world, in proportion to the population.

Of course I do not mean to say that this is all owing to elective Superintendents, and that if we substituted nomination for election, all these evils would disappear as if by magic; but what I do say is, that the nomination instead of the election of Superintendents would bring with it so great a change in the spirit and genius of our Government as would go far to introduce system and economy, where now only confusion and extravagance prevail. Every one, I think, who has read the debates in the last session of the General Assembly, when this question was discussed, and has noted the sentiments expressed by the five Superintendents who took part in them, and has well considered the principles there enunciated by these officers as to their own dignity and importance, "will arrive, as I have arrived, at the conviction that it was vain to expect, so long as the Superintendents occupy their present position, anything but the most determined opposition to any authority which does not emanate from, and is not responsible to, themselves. It will be remembered, by those who have paid attention to the debates, that the five Superintendents (the sixth being Mr. Pitz Gerald, who was at that time absent) one and all repudiated with scorn the idea that they would consent to act in conjunction with the General Government. They distinctly and pointedly refused to enter into any relations with the General Government, and, forsooth, on this plea: that being elected by, and answerable to their constituents, they would not acknowledge, nor act in conjunction with, any other authority,forgetting that these same.consti tiients are as much interested in the proper administration of those departments which are under the control of the General Government, as of those which have been left to the provincial authorities.

Now this refusal of all co-operation, the principles upon which this course is defended, and the remarkable unanimity among the Superintendents upon this one point, while divided on every other, are all, to my mind, great and significant facts ; indicating, pretty clearly, the workings of the Superintendental mind. The way in which I interpret these facts is, that no amount of confusion and disorder in the public departments will stop the Superintendents in their attempt to gain power for themselves, and that the public mono}- will be squandered in the maintenance of separate establishments,in order to increase the dignity and importance oi" the Provincial Authorities.

Whether myinterpretetionbcor be nottheright one, it is certain that this want of co-opcratiou, and the jealousy with which the departments of the Provincial "Governments are kept distinct and separate from those of the General Govern^ ment, enormously increases the expenses ot the respective establishments, and the number of salaried officials, because it prevents all idea of amalgamation and arrangement of offices. We liave.now, tor instance, in this colony of New Zealand, which contains a population not equal to that- of a largo English town., seven independent Governments-, each with its ov.ti machinery perfect and complete. "We have a Colonial Secretary, and six Provincial Soerotarit's: a Colonial Treasurer, and six Provincial Treasurers: an Attorney *Ger.enil. and six Provincial Law OiUeev»; then wo h::ve the Auditor-General, ami six Provincial Auditors — in short, every ofticev ox the General Government has six' provincial counterparts in tho provinces. You will ask, perhaps, whr.t hove, these fucts to do with the question of t-kvticn or nonelection of yuperiutfa'-lyiits: 1 say they

have everything to do with it. The maintenance of this infinity of separate establishments is the consequence of that feeling of jealousy and hostility which the provincial authorities entertain against the General Government. If the Superintendents wciv nominated, this jealousy would of necessity eo:ise at once"; because, by becoming servants of the General Government, these officers would not be allowed to act as independent princes: they would be compelled to enter, and form a part of the general system of the colony,and indeed would no longer have any object in setting up and maintaining independent establishments.

So long, on the other hand, as the two Governments —the central and provincial—continue to derive their authority from independent sources, so long will this antagonism continue, and so long will the ■.'public money continue to be squandered in superfluous establishments. The whole subject is one demanding most serious and earnest' consideration. It is far too large to be properly discussed and viewed in all its bearings within the compass of a letter; but I hope, on some future occasion, to be allowed to enter somewhat into details, and to show how a practical retrenchment might be effected, so as to reduce the enormous expense of our present machinery of Government, and also to show how this might be combined with a greater attention to local wants than we at present enjoy. Your obedient servant. A.B. To the Editor of tie " Lyttelton Times." Sir, —I have every reason to believe that lam echoing the sentiments of the majority who placed Mr. Ollivier at the head, of the poll at the late election, when I 'affirm that it was not any dislike to Mr. Ward, personally, that induced them to vote against him. On the contrary, I may assert that he is universally esteemed; but having been long considered a strenuous supporter of the present Government of the province, the election was seized upon as an opportunity of evincing the great disgust prevailing for the officials, in power, their measures, ar.d supposed nominees; and he was accordingly rejected. The smallness of the number who came to the the poll is, I apprehend, an uninistakeable symptom that the colony is weary of our present system ; to use the expression, of an Australian, who recently visited us, " we have too much Government." Let not our rulers, however, presume upon this apparent indifference. The coming general election will assuredly scatter to the winds the family compact now appropriating the income of the colony as it arises, and, in place of it, establish some cheap and simple mode of collecting and expending our revenues, in a practical, sensible, and let me add ' honest' manner. Your's Truly, Diogexes.

To the Eiiior of the Lyttelton Times.

Sir,—ln your paper of Oct. 11th you observe, m commenting on a recent letter about the Scab Act, " we should be anxious to know what • Fatr-Piay's' own opinion was when his flocks were all clean ? " It was " that the clau.se roaming it penal to 07m scabby sheet) is a jjood clause to bare-on the statute-book, leaving it to be enforced, like most other laws, by those who ' ic-e! the need of it. It- would then" be oalv ap- ! plied tocases of veal culpability. Enforced by the piiiodical visits of a Government officer, cirned out compul«orily by the magistrates' whatever their private opinion, without discretionary power either to remit the fine or extend t:ie hvjvi, that clause acts with most unfair soveruy. i his was, and this is, ' Fair-Play's ' opuijon. \ I obser/o that t-Lc " owner of clean sheep." in hu« Jetu-r pa-ilwhed in your p:, per of Ort'] lth uncon^ioa.iyadinii.allthatl have been con. t;-muHg{or,whea he says that after men have" been driven to take- " double care, anxiety and erpeuss in the watch in- of their flot-ks. ull thh w;U not present sh-rjp oceashnalhy ulrat/hq " . and it is jiLst this «s occasional st»ym- wincli prevents the cleaning of lar^e rfoMs irora ever bftin- made a matter of wrtftintj, vviwicvcr may be said by those rejoicin" au ii,« stro.^ position «f Bucce^ful experience.^ 1 tlunk I could point out other fallacies in both lUe aiwwcra to " Fair-Play's " letter- but I am aaziotw tnat lengthijiew*. at least, should Xiot oscluda me Ironi your «oiuniu.s, and refnrin. Your obedient humble servant, Faih-Play.

To the Editor of the Lyttcltoih Times

Sir, —I see it .stated in your paper, in a notice of a public meeting held in Christchuvch with reference to draining the Town Reserves, and the Ferry. Road, districts, tlvat, the majority were in favour of a ditch, 12 ft. wide, carried by the north side of the Ferry Road. As oue present on that occasion, I must assert that that was not a fair expression of the. feeling of the meeting. Thelargest portion were opposed to the ditch by the road as dangerous and illegal, and were in favour of a drain down Jackson Creek, were that practicable. Farmer, Ferry Road.