The Politician.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 229, 29 January 1876, Page 19

The Politician.

ANTHONY TROLLOPE ON NEW ZEALAND.

" Or making of books there is no end, " and much study is a weariness to the " flesh." Mr. Anthony Trollope is a great book-maker, but he does not weary his flesh or trouble his head by much study. He visited New Zealand a few years ago and wrote a book in which, he hashed up the statistics of the colony, adding a little partizan flavoring which he got from those New Zealand politicians with whom he was most frequently brought into contact. Last year he again paid a flying visit to New Zealand, and having spent twenty-four hours in Auckland waiting for the departure of the San Francisco steamer, he considers himself competent to pronounce judgment offhand upon the politics and finances of this colony. Mr. Trollope is an able man and fluent writer, but he is neither a painstaking nor an accurate man, wherefore it is not to be wondered at if he commits himself to a great many errors and mistakes which a little care would have kept him clear of. As an example of this, we find the following passage in his letter on New Zealand affairs which has been published in several of the Home newspapers. He says :

My sojourn in New Zealand on the present occasion was but for twenty-four hours, and I am not, therefore, prepared to say much that is new from personal observation ; but having visited the colony before, and been at some trouble to learn the nature of its Institutions, and to weigh its chances of prosperity, I was glad to avail myself even of that short time to make inquiry as to its doings. I had heard that there ■were two subjects of present paramount interest in the colony—the abolition of Provincial Governments, and the financial arrangements of Sir Julius Vogel. Some of your readers may probably be unawaremost Englishmen, probably, are unaware—that New Zealand, in imitation of the United States, has established within her borders eight subordinate Provincial or State Governments. These are called Otago, Canterbury, Nelson, Marlborough, Wellington, Hawkes Bay, Taranaki, and Auckland. Each of these has a little Parliament of its own, independent of the Colonial Parliament at Wellington. They collect and spend taxes, they manage the affairs of the State, and gentlemen composing them are paid for their services. When it is remembered that the total present population of the colony is about 325,000—equal to that of a single first-class provincial town at Home, it will hardly be thought that there is room for eight Parliaments, besides the Central Parliament—each with its own Speaker, its own records, its own Government and Opposition sides, and each with its own expenses, and there will be found room for fear that gentlemen with leisure, means, and capacity for the work will hardly be found in sufficient number among so small a community. That has at any rate become the opinion of the Central Parliament of the colony, which has, as a matter of course, in conjunction with the Governor, the power of abolishing all these inferior representative assemblies. But though there is a great majority in favor of such abolition, there is a strong opposing minority, whose chief strength lies on the voices of the superintendents or Governors of the provinces themselves. These superintendents—for such is their name though their position has been intended to be analagous with that of the State Governors in the United States —will themselves be abolished by the new measure ; and as a seat in the Central Parliament is compatible with their position, and as they are almost invariably elected so to sit, they are enabled to lift up their voices loudly in their own protection. When I was there they were doing »o, and were threatening to overcome the proposed

reform by talking on to the end of the session. And it must be owned that they had a strong constitutional ground on which to bise their reasoning. So radical a change in the nature of the Government of the country would amount, no doubt, to an alteration in the existing Constitution ; and these gentlemen assert that no such alteration should be made without an appeal to the country at large. They maintain that the present Assembly should be dissolved, and that new elections should be made in reference to this special matter —so that each elector may have an opportunity of recording his vote either for a Provincialist or a non-Provincialist. In this the minority is probably right. But I believe that the colony at large is undoubtedly in favor of abandoning its petty Parliaments —and that they will be abandoned.

There is a superficiality and inaccuracy about the foregoing extract sufficient to cause Mr. Trollope's essays on the colonies to rank as works of fiction. There is doubtless a basis of truth on which he builds, but New Zealand institutions are not precisely what Mr. Trollope herein describes them to be. It is wholly inaccurate to say " that '' New Zealand, in imitation of the " United States, has established within " her borders eight subordinate or pro- " vincial State governments." This was the work of the Imperial Parliament, which conferred a Constitution on New Zealand without consulting the wishes of the colony on the matter. Even the New Provinces Act was validated by a covering statute of the British Parliament, "if the colony had been consulted before the Constitution was settled we should not have had the Provincial Government difficulty to deal with now, and the vast resources of this young country would not have been dissipated, as they have been, by provincial cliques and rings, which have done pretty much as they pleased with the Crown lands. The Constitution Act is likewise accountable for the attendance in the General Assembly of Superintendents of provinces, out of which circumstance has arisen much of the mischief with which the provincial system has been charged. Mr. Trollope does not apparently know these facts or he would not write of the Constitutional question as he does ; but not knowing them, what reliance can be placed on the statements of a writer who says of New Zealand that he had '' been at some trouble to learn the " nature of its institutions and to weigh " its chances of prosperity?" The truth is, Mr. Trollope does not know the A.B.C. of New Zealand political history. Then, again, he gets rid of the legal difficulty raised by Sir George Grey and the Opposition to the passing of the Abolition Bill in a summary way. Mr. Trollope can dispose of of Parliament, rules of legal interpretation, and constitutional practice as summarily as he disposes of facts of history. He writes of abolition : f { That has at any " rate become the opinion of the Central " Parliament of the colony, which has, as " a matter of course, in conjunction with " the Governor, the power of abolishing " all these inferior representative assem- " blies." Why "as a matter of course ]" Surely this is most flippant and misleading. "As a matter of course'' the Colonial Parliament and the Governor could do nothing of the kind ; but by virtue of words introduced into an Act of the Imperial Parliament validating the constitution of the County of Westland, it has been held that the General Assembly has the power to abolish Provincial Government. Not "as a matter " of course," however ; but as a matter of expediency, putting a strained interpretation upon the Imperial statute, the Colonial Parliament passed an Act abolishing the provinces in deference to the wishes of the people who had come to abhor provincialism. These are the hard and dry facts of the ease. We are prepared to justify the action of the General Assembly, but in doing so we shall not shirk the difficulties of the position. As a matter of political expediency the provincial form of government has been abolished.

It is equally absurd of Mr. Trollope to compare the Superintendents of provinces with the governors of States in America. There is hardly any analogy between their functions. Mr. Trollope does not appear to understand this, but his not understanding what he is writing about is no bar to his making sweeping assertions. He has this advantage also that he is " a travelled man," and i 3 addressing persons who have not travelled quite so far as himself, and who therefore do not know that, although personally at home, he is literally all abroad in his facts. Mr. Trollope next disposes of New Zealand finance in a way which must surprise the Colonial Treasurer. Mr. Macandrew declared last session that he did not understand the finances of the colony, although we suspect this was a slight exaggeration ; but if Mr. Macandkew did not understand it, how can Mr. Anthony Trollope know anything about it. He met no man in Auckland, during his twenty-four hours' sojourn, who could have enlightened him on the subject, except it might have been Judge Gillies, and certain we are that he did nothing of the kind. Here is what Mr. Trollope writes on the financial position of New Zealand : Sir Julius "Vogel and his loans is perhaps a more important matter. If anything can ruin a young colony, one would say that such, a debt as eighteen millions sterling would ruin a colony possessing a population not higher than 325,000 : and such, under the successful arrangement lately made by Sir Julius,

is now the debt of New Zealand. This, I think, imposes an individual debt of about £SO upon every colonist, man, woman, and child, with an annual burden of about £2 3s. each for interest. We are apt to think that we bear a very crushing debt at Home when the interest defrayed by every man, woman, and child is about 17s. Cd. each. In England, too, efforts have been made to remove taxation as much as possible from the poor and throw it upon the rich ; whereas no such efforts can be made in a colony, which has no rich class and no poor class. If an average working man's family may be supposed to consist of four persons, when'the average working man will have to contribute 3s. 3d. a week, or nearly a day's wages per week, towards the interest on the public debt, I do not know of any conditions of national indebtedness so high as this. And it seems to be understood in New Zealand that if Sir Julius "Vogel remains in power the system of borrowing, of which he is so great a master, is to be continued. According to his theory, the outlay of money which a government is thus enabled to make will produce an amount of prosperity which the debt cannot injuriously affect. The outlay, no doubt, is made, and pleasant results are the immediate consequence. One pleasant result is the popularity of the politician who has dared to cast high wages broadcast through the land, and who, as a natural consequence of such liberality, will of course receive the suffrages of those who have for a while lived and thriven on his system. Such a system may last a time, and may answer the purposes of this or that bold and speculative politician; but with a country, as with an individual, the time will come when debts must be paid or bankruptcy ensue. Ido not predict bankruptcy to New Zealand. The mother country will probably save so well-loved a colony from that position. But if she did so, she would demand to have the management of its finances for a time in her own hands. It seems to me quite possible that Sir Julius Vogel, if he remain long enough in power, may bring New Zealand to this condition.

Now this is unfair to the colony, being calculated to lower its credit, and it is unjust—most unjust to Sir Julius "Vogel. The loans are not '' his loans ;" they are colonial loans, and the expenditure has been so far fairly reproductive. Mr. Trollope takes no account of the results of the loan expenditure. There is no stock taken. He does not speak of the roads and bridges, and railways, the wharves, docks, and lighthouses, the thousands of miles of telegraph constructed, the peace conquered by the colony when the mother country abandoned New Zealand to its fate—the millions of treasure and hundreds of lives sacrificed to maintain the supremacy of the Queen in New Zealand ; —nothing is said of these heroic efforts by New Zealand, nor of the thousands of starving and struggling people who have been brought from Great Britain by the " speculative " genius " of " Sir Julius "Vogel and " his loans." Why, one would think that Sir Julius had borrowed eighteen millions on his own account, and "cast " high wages broadcast through the "land" to purchase political support. Never was suggestion more cruel or more false than this, and Mr. Anthony Trollope should have the grace and manliness to retract his injurious statements. Does he not know that the eighteen millions of which he speaks covers the New Zealand Company's debt, which was saddled upon the colony by the Imperial Parliament prior to the Constitution 1 Is he not aware that it embraces also several millions borrowed by the provinces on the security of the land fund, and that except as a matter of account between the Colonial and Provincial treasuries, the interest on this sum is not borne upon general taxes. Doubtless it is a first charge upon the Consolidated Loan Act, but in reality it is a charge upon the land fund.

It is needless, however, to go into this question at any great length. Mr. Trollope does not in the least understand the financial position of New Zealand. His balance-sheet may satisfy a novel-loving and novel-reading people, but we who live in New Zealand must smile at their credulity. Here it is: "New "Zealand liabilities, eighteen millions; " assets, nil." This is the simple statement of the case by Mr. Anthony Trollope. Why, "Peru the penniless" is better off than that. It at least has got a little guano and gravel to trade upon according to The World, while Mr. Trollope avers that New Zealand owes eighteen millions, and the only thing it has got for the expenditure of this large sum of money is the ephemeral popularity of Sir Julius Vogel. And thus history is written and lies. One word in conclusion. Mr. Trollope assumes that New Zealand will go into liquidation. This is a gratuitous piece of impertinence which should have been resented by the official representatives of New Zealand in the United Kingdom. When Canada was recently assailed, its representatives took prompt measures to rebut the damaging statements. And so it is of other colonies. New Zealand alone appears to be represented either by too much dignity or too little brains, hence it is that every creature from '' Master Humfrey " to Mr. Anthony Trollope may have his fling at it in security. No matter how absurd or how untruthful may be statements made to the detriment of New Zealand, they pass unchallenged and unrebutted. Fortunately, Sir Julius Vogel was in. England to expose "Master Humerey," but no one seems to have taken Mr. Trollope to task for his mischievous and misleading statements.