New Zealand Mail. PUBLISHED WEEKLY. SATURDAY, OCTOBER 14, 1871. THE WEEK.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 38, 14 October 1871, Page 11

New Zealand Mail. PUBLISHED WEEKLY. SATURDAY, OCTOBER 14, 1871. THE WEEK.

The discussions which have taken place in Parliament relative to the Ministerial proposals have been more than usually animated and critical. In treating of great public questions we have kept out of sight party views and exigencies, and we shall"continue to do so. We hold that it is contrary to all precedent to ask the House to sanction such great constitutional ohanges as those referred to by Mr Yogel with regard to the provinces, at so late a period of the session, and without the country having been previously informed as to the radical nature of those proposed changes. With / regard to the San Francisco mail service, we 'are clearly of opinion that the country cannot afford so costly a luxury; but we hold, not the Government, but the House responsible for any evils which it may occasion. The Ministry have been blamed for not showing a more conciliatory disposition towards the other colonies in regard to this service ; but we doubt whether these colonies would in any case have consented to subsidize a mail service to San Francisco via New Zealand. We have the authority of the Postmaster General of New South Wales for positively asserting that, so far as that colony is concerned, it would not; this country being considered too far out of the direct route. If the Ministry is to be blamed for having entered into the contract, it will be blamed for having too faithfully attempted to carry out the absurd wishes of a majority of the House. The proposals relative to giving compensation for land required for railway and station purposes are just and reasonable, and in harmony with “ Modern Thought.” While the subject of public works is before the House we shall be excused for again calling attention to the absolute necessity which exists for the creation of an enlightened opinion as one of the best safeguards against official incompetence, jobbery, and mismanagement. We find it stated in the Hobaf t Town “ Mercury,” that one half of the £450,000 laid out by the Launceston and Western Railway Company had been recklessly squandered, and that they had, in fact, only been making ducks and drakes of the money entrusted to their care. In consequence of the extravagant way railways were at first constructed in India the Minister of Finance last year had to provide the enormous sum of £1,750,000 to meet the loss on the guaranteed interest. With such facts as these before us we cannot be too careful to guard against their occurrence here. “ Public opinion with us,” says the Melbourne “ Argus,” “ is always strongly in favor of public works, remunerative or otherwise, and the Ministry that does or promises most in this direction, carries with it the popular sympathies and votes.” As a check and safeguard, it recomends that all undertakings of an engineering character should be conducted by the public works department; aud that that department should be put under an experienced and competent head entirely beyond the annoyance of being interfered with by members of Parliament. It adds “ Nor is that all. Before we can consider ourselves perfectly secure against the occurrence of gross blunders we must see a thoroughly enlightened public opinion grow up amongst us. Then, and not till then, half-considered schemes will be at once put aside and no public works be undertaken which will not return a benefit equal to its cost.”

In Victoria the select committee on railways has recommended “ that in future contracts for railway extension, the expenditure be restricted to a sum not exceeding £SOOO per mile, stations and rolling stock includedand Mr Fairlie’s agent offers to construct railways for that sum and take payment in debentures. The best thing, says the “ Telegraph,” that we

can do with our reminiscences of English railways is to forget them. In the Mysore district, in India, a 3ft 3in guage railway is being constructed at £4500 per mile, and Lord Mayo’s reason for the change is thus given. —“ If a gentleman of small means who proposed to start upon a journey purchased an elephant in order to carry a donkey load of baggage, I am afraid that his friends would consider him to be possessed of that limited amount of intelligence which nature has bestowed on the humbler animal.” We shall not be such donkeys in New Zealand ; thanks to the experience purchased by other countries relative to railway construction. We must make the bung to fit the barrel, and not the barrel to acommodate the bung; and it would have been wise had we adopted i|his principle in other matters besides tkatrof railways. We have decided upon, having light, single line railways, as being amply sufficient for our present requirements. But if we gather experience from the lessons taught by other countries, it will be also necessary to guard against the construction of railways which will not be likely to create sufficient traffic, not only to pay their working expenses, but the interest on their cost. There is danger that a pressure may be brought to bear on the Ministry in order to prevent so wholesome a rule being adopted. We have- received further papers showing principal results of the late census, as they relate to live stock and dairy produce. From these we find that the total number of horses in the colony is 81,028 ; of cattle, 436,592 ; of sheep, 9,700,649 ; of pigs, 151,460 j and of poultrj, 872,174. The colony produced 5,199,072 lbs butter, and 2,547,507 lbs cheese ; much more than one-half of the latter having been made in Canterbury. That province also stands first in the production of butter, Auckland being second, and Wellington third. Otago has the largest number of horses, cattle, and sheep, Canterbury being second as regards live stock, and by far the first as regards dairy produce. Auckland and Wellington are pretty equal as regards horses and cattle, but the former province has less than one-third the sheep possessed by Wellington, and not much more than one-fourth those possessed by Hawkes’ Bay. Auckland stands second amongst the provinces for dairy produce; Wellington third in the production of butter, and fourth in the production of cheese. In comparing the returns from the several electoral districts of the province of Wellington we find that more than half the sheep in the province depasture in Wairarapa j which district also has the largest number of horses, cattle, breeding cows, and pigs. Wanganui and Rangitikei stand next; the former heading the latter in horses, but in no other description of live stock. The returns show a gratifying increase over those of the previous census, amounting, in some cases, in the four years, to 25 per cent.