THE PREMIER IN REPLY TO THE SUPERINTENDENT OF OTAGO.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XI, Issue 105, 22 April 1876, Page 2

THE PREMIER IN REPLY TO THE SUPERINTENDENT OF OTAGO.

- ,-•/ 1> r! . • *v

• ' " ': — — — 'J [{From tho N. Z. Times, April 21.) ,; [ . , Wellington, April 13. .Sir— I have the honor to acknowledge the rccept of your ht'e>.r of the Gth of April iu , which I informed your lienor of Messrs Gisborne, Seed, and Knowle»' projected visit, and asked your good otHce3 on their behalf. Your letter opens up tho whole ques ion of the abolition ot the provinces. Ido not think that it-is right for me to discuss with vou the general-qu-stibn. for to do W would* invo've a political controversy into which it would be inexpedient to entrr, because either of ua is addressing tbo other in his capacity of administering, not fr.m'ng, the laws. Yet there are piints in your lettor to which I feel called upon to reply, and I must comment upon them, though I am awire that in doing eo I cannot altogether avcid the political discussion which I deprecate. Tbe Government conceive it to be their duty to accept the law as it Btan-ts, and to nuke the necesary preparations for giving it effect. The idea that the Assembly ' will be willing to exempt Utago from the operation of the Act, seems ti the Governmentaltogethcr chimerical. Your Honor seems to base it on two ground*): one, that the people of Otago are wholly averse to abolition; the othe**, tbat the colony will benefit *tr)m it at the expense of Ota?p. To take the latter first: It seems to me that your Honor's own calculations answer this point. You state that "the probable revenue of Otago may be set down nt about (-ne half ■ that of /the whole colony." You coitißi.ler,. also, that, stripped of all extraneous matter, " the colonial finance and not the good of the people of New Zealand 'is at tho bottom of the proposed changes." If it be the case tbat > colonial finance is the cause of the 'Change, and that Otago n presents half of that finance,' it. ia evident the change cannot be made without Otago being ■ included in it. Youf -Honor's argument amounts to this : The" wealth if Otago 1 far excee is that of the other p'dvinces, and, therefore, its interest is to evade a commensurate ahare Of the responsibilities. CU arly suuh a deduction, if the premises are admitted, could not be accepted. I will» not deny that colonial finance makes abolition necessary, but by the expression " colonial finance," I do not mean as your Honor appears to do, solely the expenditure of the Colonial Government. Tlie Governments, Provincial and General together, are spending much more than the credit oi the colony can afford. The d : ffi:ultios arising out of Provincial borrowing 6topped all large Provincial works after 1867, and. before 1870 At tho. latter period the colony stepped in, and 8-tid that although the provinces could not be permitted to, borrow, the works should be done for them. No province hai received larger consideration than Otago; the expenditure there has betn, and is, absolutely g*gunt ; c, considering the population, but I am glodto feel aieured uot larger than the capabi-ities of ths province justify. You and I may very correctly have unlimited faith in

j {For continuation of Newt see fourth pagej

O logo's capabilities, but we do not supply , tie money tor developing them. C-mmon prudence urges that we should defer to tbe opinion of those \iho do. and who urge us to be content with a moderately rapid rate of progress., ..But your Honor draws no line — no amount of expenditure has contended you, the cry is still fqr more. Instead of Ot-igo being a stifferer by colonial finance it is as much as any other provmee the cause of colonial finance requiring the extinction of the provinces. It is true others have had to receive more- or less exceptional assistance from the revenue whicli Otago has not required, but no province has asked for large sums m >re freely, and no province has shown itself le»s disposed to restrain expenditure. During the last session of the Provincial Council appropriations were passed, amounting to £909,000. Concurrently the province has e icrificed its land by large sales to rruholders* it has endeavored to withdraw irom or^'aary purposes enormous blocks of country for fear the land might be otherwise absorbed. Io short the Provincial Government for. Bome time past hae proceeded as fast as it possibly could, in anticipation, apparently, of some dreaded change: I wholly disagree then, with the idea that the colony will benefit from abolition at the txpense of Otago. The benefit will be on the Bide of tbe various d;stricts which compose the province, the r - sources ot which will be placed more immediately under tbeir, own control, and dealt w'th less lavishly than of late has been the cate. In thus criticising the Provincial Government I am only actiog in self-defence. Your Honor impugns the colonial finance as vicious, and Bays the province is sacrificed to it, and my' endeavor has been to show that the evil is not where you have supposed it. Instead of Otago Buffering from the oolony, the people must, be blind indeed if theiy are unaware that both in r tpect to publio works and immigration, the colony, bas done for tbem in five yeara that wbicb the province could not have effected in more than double that period. To turn now ' the first ground on which it seems to me your Honor rests your expectation that the Assembly would except Otago from abolition; namely, that the people are opposed to it. I should be inclined to give much more weight to that ground did I not know that the people wholly misunderstand the meaning of abolition. Your Honor's letter is a proof of this. |It abounds with evidence that you altogether misunderstandwbat abolition will effect, or what tbe people require. When your Honor complains of a large extent ol country like Taranaki having more representatives than the City of Dunedin, you ignore one of the causes of the prosperity of the Colony. New'Zealand has. thriven because it is not a city-ridden country, and because the rural districts have not beea sacrificed to make htge citie .. The country districts are the sources from which the wealth flows tothe towns, and evil will be the day when they . are given only to a population representation, and a square mile in a town is allowed larger power than a thousand square miles in. the cju"try. The expressions "political communism," provincial institutions " wantonly destroyed," "the system of administration of its locil affairs which is to be centred at Wellington," "depriving it (dago) of its revenues, and bringing them under the sole appropriation of the Parliament at Wellington," show that your Honor does not realise what abolition means. It is fair to suppose that the people on whose b -bill' youspeak are similarly misinformed, and in tho lace of this want of acquaintance with the ' effects of abolition, tbeir alleged opposition to it bas little weight. No pirt of provincial institutions wbich concern the interests or tbe real local powera of. the people will be destroyed, the' people will possess much more local control than hitherto, and the absorption of their revenue is mythical.. What will take place is this, that the fotm of provincialisoi will cesse; and so will the powers of a small legislature. Certain services, such as the cbarge of gaols and police, will be managed by the officers of tho General Government without ninety-nine outof a hundred peop'e being aware of the change. Wellington wilt have no more to do with the matter than it has with your local po.'t and telegraph oUces. For yearß tbe management of the police at Auckland has been ia the haads of the General Government without th° people feeling that theirjlccal privileges are ourtailed, whilst th^y have recognised the thoroughly efficient manner in which the duties bave been performed. But in respect to real local powers, the decentralization will be comp'ete. As a firat evidence of decentralization, the towns will be distinct from, and have no powers over, the country districts. But the iowaa will mt be uncared for. B-ssidee the revenue from licenses, they will have a direct cubsidy Tho road dietriots, wherever they ex'tt, will not -be under the control of the larger districts- They, as well ad those larger districts called counties, will have independent revenues, independent duties, and independent powers. The chairmen of counties will be ' representative elected mea. The ada inist ration of the land will continue to be localised. The land revenues will be strictly devoted to local purpose-). Some small contribution may perhaps be given to the trunk railways, which cannot be regarded as local, either ia their nature or purpose, and the management of wbich the colony will u ider.-. take. There are abunlant proofs tbat the management cannot be assumed too early for the benefit of all concerned. The revenue? from educational reserves, the control of education, of charitable institutions, and of harbour improvements, will likewise remain with local bodies. Where is there at present any such system of local government ? Your Honor does not disguise your' wish thit Otago should be to all intents and purposes a separate colony; in ohcr words, a comparatively small Government would jealously absorb all the powers the Colonial Government absoluie'y renounce. You wish to give to Otago tbe very form of government you mistakenly suppose wo desire to bestow. When the peaple of Otago come to know how entirely decentralising will be the effects of • abolition, how essentially centralising are the viewß of the Provincial Government which oppose it, I cannot doubt but that th n y will be warm supporters of abolition. ' For the sake ot argument I have accepted your Honor's interpretation of the feelings of the people of Otago, without altogether agreeing with ifc. Many districts in the Province long for abolition to remove evils of which they have for years complained. In laying such stress up >n the country districts it may be urged tbat T have ignored Dunedin's intere-t in the question. Dunedin will lose tbe expenditure inci iental to being the seat of a small Government; and I am not unaware that the opponents of abolition, and notably a section of the Dunedin press, hare m-ule. the most of the diminished expenditure of this kind, whilst they have temptingly hinted at the glorias of the seat of Government of sn independent Otago— but Ido not think tbat these opinions are generally shared. I cannot believe that tha acu.e and able business men of Dunedin will refuse to see that the interests of the country districts, and the prospsrity ot the'whole colony, which is pervaded by their commercial activity, are of far more importance to them than the expenditure incidental to the localisation ot a form of Executive Government, and to the occasional meetings of the Provincial Councils. Allow me, in conclusion, to thank your Honor for the courtesy of your letter, and to express the hope that I have said nothing herein which may. be considered unfair in reply to your Honor's strong, though not discourteous reflections on the Colonial Government. . J. bave, &c, Julius Voobl.