New Zealand Times. MONDAY, JANUARY 4, 1875.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4301, 4 January 1875, Page 2

New Zealand Times. MONDAY, JANUARY 4, 1875.

Ouk Christchurch contemporary, the/Ve.s.s, has a leading article, in its issue of the 29th ultimo, in which it reviews the arguments for and against the abolition of Provincial Government. It very pithily remarks at the outset that, “Everyone “ who hopes to see How Zealand develop “ into a nation, everyone whose vision “ extends beyond the limits of his own “ particular province, must deplore the “ existence of the present system—a sys- “ tom which forbids all hope of unity and “ nationality by fostering all kinds of “ sectional differences, and under which “ the finances and affairs of the colony “ are habitually regulated as may serve “ the interests or the necessities of the “Provincial Governments.” Fortunately, those who cherish the hope of a great future for Hew Zealand- are far more numerous than those who desire to preserve existing institutions, with their narrow political guage and unequal administration. A colonial public opinion is slowly but surely ripening, and we have to credit the district newspapers mainly with this result. Even in the Wellington province, close by the seat of Government, the district newspapers have done much to replace a narrow provincial for an enlightened colonial opinion, and we take this occasion of unreservedly acknowledging their efforts to that most desirable end. This is the case also in all the other provinces. The leading newspapers, on the other hand, being published in the various provincial capitals, are more or less identified with the local governing cliques, and it is in the outlying districts, therefore, that the expression of free thought must be looked for on the proposed constitutional changes. There are, however, exceptions to this general rule, and the Canterbury Press- is an honorable exception. It has, consistently and persistently, labored to prepare the public mind for the concentration of the' political life of the colony, by the abolition of- Provincial Government. The Press , in the article from which we have already quoted, remarks :

As yefc there is scarcely any opposition. The principle of abolition is generally accepted. Through all the country districts it is welcomed witli acclamation; and even in the centres of population, which have reaped all the advantages of provincialism, and where some feeling in favor of the system might have been expected to display itself, the change meets with approva l . Such actual resistance as there is comes from the band of Superintendents and provincial office-holders. Other opponents seem chiefly anxious to acquit themselves of the charge of being provincialists. They shrink nervously from any open avowal of their opinions, and only venture to offer feeble appeals for delay. Under those circumstances, there is no occasion to carry the argument further. We may assume that the case is given up, and that the provinces are to be abolished by common consent. There still, however, remains the important question —shall tlie abolition be entire or partial ? In other words, shall tho process of abolition be a summary or a gradual one ? Granting that the provinces must go, must they all go together. Would it be better to do away with the provincial system absolutely and at once, or to establish some other system over a part of the colony, and to allow the remaining provinces to fall into it by degrees, as they become unable or unwilling to maintain their separate governments. Our contemporary then adverts to the fact that the proposal, as it stands at present, is one of partial abolition ; and allusion is made, not only to the debate in the House of Representatives on Mr. Vooel’.s resolutions, but to Mr. Bowen’s speech at Rangiora, to show that “the “ Government policy is in literal confor- “ mity with the resolution of last session, “ and contemplates the abolition of the “ Northern provinces only.” It then proceeds to consider “ whether this sepa- “ rate dealing with the two islands is a “ statesmanlike policy, or deserving of “ support.” On this point the Press is at one with Mr. Sewell, and the bulk of New Zealand journals, if we except two or three of the Southern newspapers ; and its language is so plain and straightforward that we cannot refrain from reprinting it in this place. Our contemporary writes : Our answer Is most emphatically in tho negative. Such a course is, on Mr. Vogel's own showing, very Inadequate; for there are provinces in the Middle Island to which his arguments for abolition apply as forcibly as to any In the North. Marlborough, Nelson, and Westland are as incapable of maintaining themselves, and as burdensome to the Colonial Treasury, as Auckland, Taranaki, and Wellington. We believe, too, that the thing is impracticable. Tho attempt to keep up in one country two radically different systems of internal government, involving differences which must be felt in any demand for executive or administrative action, seems to us a palpable absurdity. But beyond and above these objections, wo altogether condemn the principle. We cannot go Into this part of tho question now; it is too important to be treated at tho end of an article, and must be reserved for separate discussion. Wo may say, however, that in our opinion the advocates of partial abolition take far too narrow a view of the case. They reduce everything to a mere question of revenue. They ignore all considerations but those which belong to pounds, shillings, and’pence. "Tho northern provinces are poor," they cry, "lot them be abolished. But Canterbury and Otago are well off; they must be respected and left untouched." We protest against tins flagrant injustice to tho North Island. Provincialism has no more consistent unflinching opponents than ourselves; but no proposal for the abolition of tho provinces will win our support which does not deal impartially with both .islands, which makes revenue the test of right, and which allows to the well-to-do provinces of tho Middle Island political privileges which, on account of poverty, arc denied to the North. It would bo impossible to controvert tho rigidly logical conclusion of the Press , were wo disposed to challenge its arguments; but wo have no such intention. The feeling of tho country is unraistakeably in favor of tho total abolition of the provincial form of local government, and that being so, wo say with Mr. Sewell, the sooner tho change is made tho hotter; but wo are not prepared to admit that it would bo impossible to carry out tho policy of the Government, as embodied in tho resolutions of last session, were tho country content to accept the proposal for restricting tho constitutional changes to the North Island. Doubtless, it would simplify matters greatly, and tend to increased efficiency and economy in administration, wero one uniform system of government established; and

that, as we take it, is the main aim of the constitutional amendment proposed by the Government. We have no doubt the Executive were unaware of the general feeling in favor of the total abolition of the provinces, as political entities; but as they will have had ample means of guaging public opinion during the recess, they will doubtless be prepared to conform to its widest demand.