New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) MONDAY, AUGUST 2.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4483, 2 August 1875, Page 4

New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) MONDAY, AUGUST 2.

The Ministerial policy is now before the country, and in a few days we may expect to hear the opinions of the people, as reflected through the newspaper Press of the colony. Meanwhile, we are in a position to state that a majority of the House of Representatives pledged themselves to carry the Government Bills through during the present session, at a /meeting of Ministerial supporters held on last. Of course there were differences of opinion on some points involved in the Ministerial policy, but there was perfect unanimity on the question of provincial abolition. We may likewise add, that Ministers entertain no doubt whatever as to the power of the General Assembly to abolish Provincial Government, and we believe they are fortified by the strongest assurances from the highest quarters. The debate on the financial policy will be resumed to-morrow, when the points' of attack" (if any) will be defined. The second reading of- the Provincial Abolition'Bill, will be moved on : Friday ; but as we take it, the debate on the financial proposals of the Government will anticipate most that can be said on those measures. At all events, by Friday evening the Government will be in a position to judge accurately of the Parliamentary position. This could scarcely be the case if the debate on the Financial Statement were less exhaustive than it promises to be ; but. thanks to the bold enunciation of policy, and disclosure of ways and means, a flank movement is impossible. The Opposition must traverse the financial policy if they hope to carry the House against the Bills introduced to give it effect. We do not anticipate a general surrender at the first attack, and it would be a political misfortune were it to so happen. The country has a right to expect that the proposals of the Government shall be fully and exhaustively debated, not in tho spirit of party, but with an honest and earnest desire to arrive at the best possible result. The proposals are not of a temporary character. On the contrary, they propose to make a vital and permanent change in the Constitution. The country, we believe, is in favor of change ; and care should be taken not to baulk the reasonable expectation of the people. Hence, we argue, the General Assembly should give its most earnest attention to the subject, with the. view of perfecting the Government measures, and rendering them more acceptable to all classes. In proposals of such wide compass there must, of necessity, be points of detail and of principle, dividing opinion ; but if the paramount necessity for settling the vexed constitutional question be borne in mind, these differences of opinion will result in mutual concession and compromise, to the ultimate gain of the colony. Of course, we do not for a moment countenance the wasting of time in useless discussion. We should very much regret if any attempt were made to defeat the Bills by " talking " against time ;" on the other hand, it would be wise to- allow a good deal of latitude in that direction. It may be, however, that the opinion of the country will be so overwhelmingly declared in favor of the Government policy as to justify Ministers in using their majority to press their measures through with the least possible delay. Should such be the case, the parliamentary battle will be short, sharp, and decisive.