New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) FRIDAY, AUGUST 20.
The debate on the Abolition of Provinces Bill was continued yesterday, five speeches having occupied the entire sitting from three in the afternoon till midnight. The speakers were Messrs. Reeves, Cttrtis, Ward, Stafford, and White. Taken as a whole, the debate was well sustained throughout. Of course, a very different estimate must be formed of the addresses of the several speakers. To Mr. Stafford belongs, as of right, the foremost place. His speech was a brilliant one. It sustained his old reputation. The interest of the House never flagged for a moment. Mr. White, who followed, spoke at a great disadvantage, partly, we believe, because he rose to prevent the reply from the Colonial Treasurer being entered on during a lull in the debate, and partly also from the characteristics of the two speakers. The disadvantage was all on the side of Mr. White, but he acted pluckily under very trying circumstances. It is needless to add that he spoke in opposition to the Bill.
The speech of Mr. Stafford was a valuable contribution to the constitutional history of New Zealand. There were several omissions, however, which no doubt will be supplied by subsequent speakers. Meanwhile we accept it, as far as it goes, as a reliable summary of the political events in which he has been a prime actor for more than twenty years. And Mr. Stafford, as the result of mature judgment, of calm reflection, and long official experience, declares that provincial abolition is essential to the good government and progress of New Zealand. This is an opinion entitled to great weight. It is not a rash or hasty opinion ; it is not the result of pique ; ii has no direct bearing upon his political standing or future prospects. Therefore it will be treated with due consideration and respect by the country. Undoubtedly those objections do lie, more or less, against the opinions of other gentlemen who have taken a prominent part in the debate ; and as the public are apt, according to the impulse of the hour, to put the worst construction upon the motives of public men, the objections we refer to are calculated to outweigh, with many, a score of cogent reasons. But against Mr. Stafford no such objections can lie. His opinion will be accepted as unbiassed by both sides, and it will be weighed aceording to its merits. Now, the point of the lion, gentleman's speech which appeared strongest to our mind, was that in which he declared, in effect, that the abolition of Provincial Government was essential to the creation of a healthy public opinion. At present, the political power of the people is divided by the provincial system. The influence of the people is paralysed by it; and there never can be a strong political force controlling the Executive, through the House of Representatives, until the political divisions of the colony are abolished. On that point, and it is the kernel of the whole, we are in accord with Mr. Stafford. Our available space does not permit us to follow him through his admirable speech.' Were it possible to do so, we might have some objections to urge ; but as we are agreed on the main point, it is needless to refer to minor matters.
Mr. Reeves delivered an able and argumentative address in opposition, in which he administered a well-merited castigation to Sir Cracroft Wilson, for his unprovoked and wanton attack upon Mr. Moorhouse, in Jus former capacity of Superintendent of Canterbury, as well as upon Mr. Superintendent Macandrew. It is a pity that the good feeling and moderation of the debate should have been disturbed by a speech which was simply contemptible as an argument, and pitiable as an exhibition of senile vanity. The cheers which followed Mr. Reeves's vindication afforded the best proof of the sense and sympathy of the House. Mr. Moorhouse was an absent, and therefore a silent man. His character was unjustly assailed, and his official acts were injuriously misstated. It was consequently the duty of some member of the House to defend the character of a gentleman who has done ten thousand times more for the province of Canterbury, than his assailant has ever done, or is capable of doing. Of Mr. Curtis, we may simply say that he spoke well and to the point, as he always does ; while Mr. Ward made a very creditable first appearance, in opposition to the Bill.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZTIM18750820.2.9
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4498, 20 August 1875, Page 2
Word count
Tapeke kupu
747New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) FRIDAY, AUGUST 20. New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4498, 20 August 1875, Page 2
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.