New Zealand Mail. PUBLISHED WEEKLY. SATURDAY, JANUARY 6, 1872. THE WEEK.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 50, 6 January 1872, Page 11

New Zealand Mail. PUBLISHED WEEKLY. SATURDAY, JANUARY 6, 1872. THE WEEK.

It never fell to the lot of Dr Featherston, during the long period he administered our affairs, to obtain such a prize for the province or to secure such a triumph for himself aB his predecessor in the very first year of his administration has obtained. “ It is better to be born lucky than rich;” but that which is ascribed to good luck is frequently the result of superior tact and good management; and we feel certain that the event to which we are referring is more the consequence of the latter than the former. There appears to be a dread felt lest the just praise which all feel should be rendered to the men who are now administering our affairs should be viewed in the light of implied blame on their predecessors in office. In this respect the members of the present Provincial Government occupy a much less fortunate position than the members of a new ministry. In the latter case no scruple is felt in contrasting the results of their administration with those of their predecessors. Nor do we see why this should be the case in the present instance. The altered state and prospects of the province 19 the consequence of an altered policy, for which we are indebted to the present Government, and for which therefore they deserve to be credited. It must have been painful for Dr Featherston to find on his return from England the condition the province was in, owing in part at least to the mismanagement of those to whom he had left it in charge, and he, at all events, will not begrudge the praise which is due to those who have got it out of its difficulties and placed it in the proud position which it formerly occu*

pied of being the first and principal settlement in the colony. We wrote an article some time ago with the object of showing that “immigration” and “ colonization” were by no means synonymous terms; and that the future well-being of the people would not so much depend upon the schemes which might be adopted for bringing out emigrants to the country, as upon those ’ which would have for their object the making permanent settlers of them after their arrival. And we stated that, in our opinion, the best means for this purpose would be the promotion of local manufactures and new industries, in connection with the small farm system, in every locality which the railways will open for population and settlement. We still hold this view, and are prepared to mainlain it against all comers. The “ Evening Star” (Dunedin), in referring to that article, says, that “ there is a specious smoothness in the style of thought put forward calculated to throw the inexperieuced off their guard.” It then asserts that “ the fallacy which lies at the bottom of this reasoning is two-fold : it presumes that thousands of workmen are to finish their work at one and the same time, and that there will be no more work to be done.” In reply, we beg to state that it presumes nothing of the kind ; nor will the passage quoted bear such an interpretation. What we said was, “ that there was reason to anticipate that when the chief lines of railway have been constructed thousands of workmen will be thrown out of employment, if other means of obtaining a living are not at the same time thrown open to them j” and we are prepared to maintain this proposition. What we require is, that some scheme Bhould be adopted which will be likely to make permanent settlers of the immigrants that the railways will be the means of introducing. The Hon. Mr Holmes, in his place in the Legislative Council, endeavored to show that the Manawatu block did not furnish sufficient security for the loan of £85,000 granted to the province under the Wellington Debts Act, because that block had originally cost only £25,000. “ That fact in itself,” he observed, “ would show the nature of the bill—how utterly hollow and baseless it was, and why they should set their faces against it.” In another part of the same speech he called that block “ a bubble securityand his estimate of the inhabitants of the province was no higher than that he placed on its wealth and resources. If land which originally cost £25,0G0 could not in the course of time become a sufficient security for quadruple that amount, what are we to say with reference to the value of the land of the Middle Island, the whole of which originally cost less than the amount paid for the Manawatu block ? But what will Mr Holmes say when he learns that that much depreciated security, over which he wasted so many parrot-expletives, shed so many crocodile-tears, and wasted so much virtuous indignation, has proved sufficient to cover the whole loan asked for, and then to leave in the hands of the province an estate of 100,000 acres ? When members of the Upper House make such a ridiculous exhibition of themselves, it is no wonder that the House itself sinks in the estimation of the public. We ventured to suggest in our last issue that Agricultural Associations, in order to give encouragement to industrious and painstaking farmers, should award prizes not only for the best stock and produce but for the best managed farms. We find that this is done by the Agricultural Society of Tasmania, and that a similar plan has been recommended for the adoption of the National Agricultural Society of Yictoria. The “ Age” says, “it is essential that not only the produce should be judged, but the farms also from which it has been raised.” For this object it recommends that the money voted by the Legislature to agricultural societies should be given as prizes for good farming, and that properly qualified judges should visit from time to time and inspect those holdings whose owners had properly entered themselves as competitors for state prizes, which should range from one hundred to two hundred guineas. It adds, “ The National Society should have no control over this fund other than the appointment of judges to report to the society the various systems of tillage for publication and distribution in the farming districts, and to recommend to the Government the persons entitled to the prizes given by the state.” This suggestion is well worthy of the attention of the agricultural societies of this province, and also of the Provincial Council at its ensuing session. While, however, we think that prizes for good farming should be given, we would not recommend that prizes for stock and produce should therefore be withheld. An agricultural exhibition, in addition to emulation in an art so essential to man, gives occasion for a local holiday, and for those social reunions which occur too seldom in the outlying districts of a new country.