MR. GISBORNE BEFORE THE ELECTORS.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4589, 4 December 1875, Page 2

MR. GISBORNE BEFORE THE ELECTORS.

Last evening a meeting of the electors of the City of Wellington took place in the Odd Fellows’ Hall, to hear Mr. Gisborne’s exposition of his political views. The Hon. C. J. Pharazyn occupied the chair, and in a few remarks called upon Mr. Gisborne. Mr. Gisborne came forward and said : I will commence my remarks by some reference to a personal matter. Since I have announced my candidature for this city I have asked the Government to relieve me of my office, and I am now only holding office until they have made arrangements for my successor. My resignation is in their hands, and it will be accepted oh such a date as will be most convenient to them—(cheers.) —of course preceding the day of nomination. I also wish to emphatically deny the reports which have been spread abroad to the effect that I am put forward by a particular section of the community, or that I -wish to favor any religious body. I entirely deny the truth of that report, and challenge those who spread that report to prove its truthfulness. I wish to say that my comments on the subject of education, which have been brought forward, are the same as were brought forward on a previous occasion. They were brought forward when I sought election in 1871, when I was a responsible minister of the Crown, and they have been brought forward again now. They are absolutely identical; but I contend that my conduct has been quite consistent, and that I am not open to the charges which have been made against me. With regard to the report which has also been spread abroad that I am to have a Week-vote—l can only say that I have no intention of asking for such a thing. It is not within my personal knowledge that such a thing is to be given. I have no desire to raise any religious or national feeling. It is utterly opposed to my wishes that such a cry should be raised. I would deprecate any religious or national feeling being raised ; it is utterly repugnant to my tastes, and it would much grieve me were I to sow any seeds of disagreement in this community. These reports are nodoubt merely electioneeringdevices; and Imay say that the truereason formy coming forward is that a few friends (of different classes in life, of different creeds, and different nationalities, have kindly thought that the experience gained by me in public, life may be of some use to the colony and to you as your representative ; and I, perhaps egotistically willing to comply with that request, have ventured to come forward as a candidate at the general election. I have no wish to come into unnecessary collision with your present representatives, for whom I entertain the greatest possible personal respect ; but I cannot admit that that there is any monopoly in, the ease of representation of this city. Wellington is not a close borough. . It would be to your advantage to have a choice among many candidates. (Cheers.) The stock of representatives might he improved just like any other stock, by the occasional introduction of [strains of new blood. (Cheers.) Now, gentlemen, I am here to , offer myself to be your representative, and to state my opinions upon the principal political topics of the day. I may perhaps be allowed to observe that considerable difficulty might have been avoided with regard to a third candidate if your representatives had exerted themselves —and they would, I believe, have, successfully exerted themselves—to obtain a third member for the city of Wellington , —(cheers) —and had attempted to restore to it that amount of representation which it used to have, and which your property, your wealth, and your importance now deserve. Gentlemen, the question which perhaps is_ of the greatest importance just now, as eliciting the greatest amount of discussion, is the question of provincial abolition. Now, I will say, irrespective of the merit of the question—l am speaking as ah abolitionist, as I would have spoken as a provincialist—that a question involving organic change in the institutions of the colony, abolishing half the machinery of the Government of the colony, and depriving the people of enormous representative power should, before any . legislation took place on the subject, have been submitted to the electors of the colony at a general election. (Cheers.) I say that for the sake of constitutional principles and liberty the observance of these constitutional principles ought to be considered before immediate expediency ; that is the safeguard of our public liberty. I say that for such a principle, and upon such a question, the people, the whole people, and nobody but the people, should have been consulted first. (Cheers.) This is in reference to the past. I will now come to the state of abolition as present. Provincialism is not altogether abolished. The Abolition Act does not come into operation until after the next session of the new Parliament. Provincialism may be said to be mesmerised. It resembles the young lady exhibited here in this hall by the Fakir of Coin some time ago. It is in a state of suspended animation. I think we are agreed, generally agreed, that Provincialism should not be revived. The question now is, whether it is necessary to substitute anything in the place of the void left by its abolition. I do not wish for one moment to abolish, or in any way to infringe upon the road boards and municipalities now in existence. I would i-atlier maintain and strengthen them ; but it is a question whether any intermediate body should not be placed between these bodies and the Central Government —whether there should not be between these two some intermediate elective body, perhaps elected by the road boards and municipalities, or whatever bodies may have charge of local works. I think something of the kind is necessary. Now take the case of main roads; I don’t think it would be right that the maintenance of these should be altogether left on the hands of local boards. One road board might have part of aroad unfinished, and thereby inflict disadvantage on the whole district or the neighboring district. Then a bridge might be wanted for a river between two districts. The board might differ, and in that case there would be a deadlock, and no bridge would be made at all. Therefore, I think an intermediate body, perhaps temporarily and perhaps permanently, shouldbe organised; as is the case in the Home country. There might he boards, such as county boards, elected by municipalities and road boards themselves, who should have charge of works of a character more than local. I have, gentlemen, some authority for . this opinion. I have here an extract from a speech delivered by Sir Julius Vogel in 1873 ; it is an extract from his financial statement. He said, “ If the Assembly means to do the work of the provinces, then the provinces should be abolished, the waste of labor on provincial legislation be saved, and provision be made for a thorough system of colonial government. I express the opinion that the legislative work of the provinces and of the colony, it performed by one body of men, would necessitate the sitting of Parliament for at least ten months out of the twelve. [There’s a nice prospect for your future representative.] I shall be told that the parliamentary work of the empire itself occupies but a small portion of the year. Granted, but the circumstances are different. In a country with hundreds of years of history, rapid legislation is rarely necessary and generally undesirable. A young country requires, as do young children, more care and looking after. The argument that an old and wealthy country requires proportionately more parliamentary attention than a young and comparatively poor one, would be fairly paralleled by the assertion that infants might feed, and wash, and be mindful of themselves—that the attention of nurses should be devoted to adults. But where are we to find, in the colony, men to whom its legislation should be confided, who are willing to give ten months in the year to the task ? We find with difficulty men to whom ambition of the power to be useful, and of the position of a Minister, is inducement sufficient to lead them to consent to the personal sacrifices the position entails; but to be simply members of Parliament does not offer adequate temptation to reconcile men to entirely relinquishing their occupations, and we have not in the country a sufficient number of leisured men on whom to rely for its legislation. Therefore, if a strictly

S^ tem ere the be 3t ’ it; could not h th^w y - Ut; but 1 am not sure thm M ff i ' b ', ven * n t: ".o United Kingdom, system of T* begUt to See the necessity of a the central S n ent intermediate between the central and the purely municipal, or, in other words, of strengthening the system of county government. In the coloured I think, the want of province. has shown itseff, andto supply rt road districts are becoming powerM by some such process as that by which, according to Darwm, man has developed from a lower type. ‘ Road boards, by the process of natural selection and the survival of the fittest develop into shires, and shires may develop, indeed are developing, into provinces. I may be told that man s perfection arises from his slow development. Grant that in our case the highest form of local government has been too rapidly developed and is full of imperfections : surely it is better now to work from the vantage ground obtained than ; to endeavor to throw back our local system, in order that it may attain a higher form more slowly. But my illustration would do me injustice if it be held to indicate that I disapprove of road districts or wish to see them abolished. On the contrary, I want to see them permanent, and I believe that permanency can be better established by an intermediate form of government to work with them and over them, than by starting them on a career of ambition to supersede themselves by the attainment of a higher and different form of power. In the system of diffusion which is to make the whole colony prosperous, road_ hoards have a moat useful part to play, and it would be as improper to allow them to usurp provincial power as to allow the provinces to usurp colonial power. Now, I don t know whether he would quite adhere to those opinions now, but I think he is still of the opinion that there should be some intermediate electoral body between road hoards and the General Government if provincial institutions are to be abolished, which should take charge of matters—country matters—which are quite distinct from municipalities and road boards. Now, I am strongly in favor of road boards and municipalities being endowed from the General Government funds. There has been some objection to their being subsidised from the colonial revenue, but I don’t see the force of the objections. It is said “you take taxes with one hand, and return them with the other.” But, if it is necessary that works in road districts should be executed, I don’t see why the colonial revenue should not be taken for that purpose, and why the funds that the inhabitants of a road district contribute indirectly, should not be given back to them indirectly for their own uses, that is, to be the property of themselves, instead of the property of the General Government.! The General Government would merely' hqlp' yon to carry out your own works. J I think It right that the people of a district should tax their own property, and this would gain muclrmore force if a law were passed to tax absentee proprietors. ‘What I think might be altered in the scheme is this. Say, a district containing a thousand people gets two pounds for eyery pound raised locally, I think a district with a population of five hundred, might get a subsidy of £l. However, this is a matter of detail. With the principle of subsidies I quite agree. I think also that the question of dissolution of road boards and electing them again should be considered. I think the dissolution should take place at one time, and the elections follow all at once as the House of Representatives occurs, and not piecemeal. It would be better, because it would give the electors an opportunity, of introducing change of blood. Any ! difficulty of administration. could be ( avoided by the existing boards holding office until their successors were appointed. The next question is, what has the Opposition brought forward in opposition to the schemes? What, have they put forward at this election which they want the people of New Zealand, to accept, in place of, what has been proposed by the Government —abolition of the provinces, and the substitution of elective road boards?—The four province scheme ? Now, I may say at once that I am utterly opposed to the four province scheme and federal union, for that really means separation. This has been admitted by Sir George Grey. Therefore, I may dismiss at once the question of four provinces, and come to that of separation of the two islands, with a federal union for both of them. Now, we have only to go a little further, and say that that means absolute separation, with a federal executive merely intended to be existing in name. It also means federal legislation, but as Sir George Grey tells us, that is to be merely a nominal power. Tire Legislature must simply exist in order to register the edicts of the provinces. Therefore, the proposal which is put forward means real, absolute, and substantial separation between the two islands, absolute separation between the North and the South. The North is to be one colony, and the South is to he one colony, and with this I disagree. If that were done yen would revive in each of the provinces all the bitterness of provincialism, and there would be nothing but squabbling over the customs and fiscal laws. I can understand separation in colonies where there are large tracts of territory dividing them—tracts of territory uninhabited, or by a wide expanse of sea; but when I see two islands almost contiguous and united, only separated by a narrow strait, and with every necessity for mutual help and mutual dependence, and requiring only the strength of union to make one prosperous colony, one New Zealand home, I say the solemn words -with which you are all acquainted, “Those whom God hath joined together let no man put asunder.” (A laugh and cheers.) Well, gentlemen, the subject to which I Trill now direct your attention is that of public works and immigration. I will at once say that I ,consider the present Minister of Public Works a very excellent officer in his place, but think I may also say that Wellington has plenty of occasion for complaint of the slow rate of progress made in the public works here compared with the progress of other places. (Cheers.) With regard to immigration, I think that the arrangements made for the selection of immigrants, knowing the difficulties and disadvantages there are to labor under, reflect credit upon the gentlemen who manage the department, though, we must all deplore the great and abnormal death-rate of children of tender years coming out in the vessels. But what I want to point outasthegreat defect in the administration of the department is the absence of any provision for the settlement of the immigrants upon the land when they arrive in the colony. I feel some interest in this matter, because I was a member of the Ministry which inaugurated the policy. At that time I was Minister for Public Works, and I then laid great stress upon that part of the scheme, as I will show by extracts from public papers directly. The public works will always remain, but it is not so certain that people will, and therefore I considered at the time the most important part of the scheme to be the provision for settlement, for that was the reproductive part of the great scheme. The Ministry then—and no Ministry could then have been got strong enough was not strong enough to abolish the provinces, for even the present Ministry have had to treat the land fund very gingerly and localise it, which by the way, I fully approve of ; but the Ministry of the day had fully in mind the desirableness of settling the people on the land. In a circular which at that time I wrote to the Superintendent, that was in 1871, I said : “ An indispensable feature of the colonial policy of last session is the concurrent progress of immigration and of public works (such as roads and railways) in due relation of each to the other.” Again, “By the term ‘immigration ’ I do not mean the introduction of immigrants, but their permanent settlement on the soil. Public works without immigration, in that sense would, I fear, be a failure and waste of public funds. In order to secure this essential object it is necessary that sufficient blocks of land in the vicinity of the lines of the roads and railways should be marked out as reserved for immigration purposes. Fully anticipating your Honor's concurrence in these views, and your desire to ensure by every practicable means the success of a policy, the object of which is to people and open up—or, in one word, [to colonise waste lands, I invite with

confidence your Honor to take the necssary steps for the reservation in convement areas and in sites contiguous or adjacent to hues of railway and roads now m comse of construction of blocks of agricultural lauds to be laid off in villages and farms for the purposes of immigration.’ Then, again, in. my Ministerial statement in August, IS7I, I smd : . , “An essential part of the colonial policy is immigration. This was frequently stated by members of the Government, and influential- members of both Houses in the debates of last session, and the Act itself. If the construction of gie.it works of communication in tins coiouy be^ot pressing importance, the presence of an increased and*' increasing settled which shall to the greatest extent Hcihtatc their construction and increase their use, is equally important; and, moreover is necessary to the success, and even to the existence of the other. Progress cannot be expected ma, young colonv from public works alone. _ But the addition of settled population cannot be permanently secured without its attachment to the soil, and the and Public \\ orks Act recognises that necessity. _ Then, again, in September, ISil, I said “We regard the introduction and settlement of a suitable proportion of immigrants in each province as an indispensable complement to the construction of such public works as may be authorised within such provinces The one is the co-ordinate of the other, and the concurrent action of both is essential to the development of the great policy of colonisation which the Legislature has directed to be prosecuted. As already stated, we propose that land shall be used for the purpose of settling a proportion of the immigrants. When lauds are taken as security for the cost of _ constructing railways, tlioso lands will be available for the purpose of settlement. Butin the portions of the country where the land fund itself is the security fori the railways, we propose that compensation shall be given for the land taken.” Sir Julius Vogel, in his financial statement, in 1873, said : “ It is not necessary for me to refer now to immigration, beyond saying that Ministers recognise, as they have always recognised, that a large 'increase of the permanent population of the colony is an absolutely necessary accompaniment of the public works policy. The anxiety of the Government to promote immKTation has never abated, and it will be observed that the proposals now made are consistent with the carrying out of plans winch they regard as of the utmost importanceplans which will enable immigrants to settle upon the lands of the colony. These extracts shows that the Ministry recognised the necessity for settling the people onthe land as a salient part of the scheme ; hut I am, sorry to say that, for some reason, that part of the scheme has been altogether ignored. Except in this province and Hawke’s Bay, hardly any settlements havejbeen formed, in connection with immigration, I believe the policy that has been pursued, if proceeded with, would upset the whole scheme, and I am very glad to find that the present Colonial Treasurer and Minister for Immigration has stated that the Government have feltthe necessity of securing settlement of the immigrants ; but I am afraid that the time which has been lost will render it more difficult of accomplishment—and success more uncertain. (Cheers'. With reference to the question of education I may state at once that I am opposed to the State teaching or interferin'' with any religious creed. (Cheers), I am opposed to any State endowment to any particular religion or denomination. (Cheers). My opinion now is the same as that which I expressed in IS/1. viz., that the State should require a certain amount of secular education, but then I said and now I say that cases may occur in which it might be advisable for the State to aid schools already established, provided that these conditions are fulfilled—that the aid given is from time to time regulated according to the number of scholars educated in such school, that it was for secular education alone, that that, secular education was to be approved by the State, that the school should be always open to State inspection, that the State should, not interfere with religious education given in a school when given in the same maimer as a clergyman gives education in ordinary State schools. These are _my opinions now,'and the Act of 1871 contained such provisions as would give effect to these opinions, and such provisions have been acted upon by your late Education Board. This is what I said on the second reading of the Bill in 1871: ' . , « x fhfnlr that it will he universally admitted that education is necessary to all human kind, and that it would he as idle to argue upon that subject as it would be to argue upon the question whether the atmosphere in which we live is essential to human life. I also believe that it will be admitted, at least in any British community, that it is the paramount duty of the State to put itself at the head of any educational movement, and that it is the duty of the State to aid in promoting, controlling', and directing that movement. Well, sir, these admissions being made, what is the difficulty that prevents the State from performing that duty ? That difficulty is the religious difficulty. Whence does it arise ? It arises from the general conviction that religion is a necessary element; of education, and also from the conviction that the State cannot with: advantage teach any religion or any particular religious creed jwjain ; The solution of the religious difficulty is contained'in; those clauses which relate to ■ assistance being given to private efforts for education and also to aided schools. The condition which we impose is the condition of the conscience clause, which, it must be understood, also regulates and governs the assistance to be givenf to aided schools. The clause is to the effect that any child admitted into or continuing in schools shall not be required to attend to or abstain from attending any particular Sunday School; that it shall not be required to attend any particular religious instruction in that school; and also, that any religious instruction should be given at the beginning and end of secular education, and that, during such time, before or after, any child may he withdrawn by its parents from such religious instruction. It also provides what I think has not been sufficiently attended to by hon. members who have spoken on the. subject,—that the school shall be open at all times to the inspection of the Government Inspector of Schools, only with the restriction that it shall be no part of the duty of such Inspector to inquire into any religious instruction.”

That, gentleman, was the. opinion I expressed in IS7X, when I had, as a responsible Minister, charge of the Education Bill, and it is also the opinion which I have expressed this year in connection with the Wellington Education Board. But there are certain persons who have lately said “ Oh, don’t trust Gisborne >* on the question of education; go to Pearce and Hunter, they are your men for secular education.” Well, let us judge of the views of these Gentlemen according to public speeches made by them in Wellington. Mr. Hunter was a member of the Provincial Government which brought in the Wellington Education Act of 18717 which has a clause in it providing for aiding denominational schools. He was also a member of the Provincial Council which passed that Education Act in a new shape. As to Mr. Pearce he was likewise a member of the Council which passed that Act, And in the case of Mr. Pearce we have an additional advantage in the opinions expressed by him on the subject, because in the year 1871, in the House of Representatives, he favored the House with his views on that question. I will quote from Hansard an extract from the speech he made on the occasion to which I refer, and as the extract bears altogether on that question, I will quote it in extenso, in order that it may not be said I have omitted anything of the contest, which might lead to a misinterpretation of the views expressed. Mr. Pearce said ; “He did not propose even to touch upon the various details of the Bill, but would briefly refer to one principle, which to his mind was the fundamental one in the measure. It was that which provided for assistance to denominational schools where established by tho various churches throughout the country. He

agreed with those who thought that that portion of the Bill which related to aided schools was one that would give satisfaction to the people. He held that no child could.be said to be educated' at all, from wbom was withheld the knowledge of his accountableness to the Supreme Being, and who was not taught that this life was, after all. but a steppiugstoue to a future state. True, it was said that those matters should be left to the parents ; but it could not bo denied that ni thousands of instances, it so left, the knowledge of those truths would never roach the children. It was admitted that the duty or the Government of a country did not end with the protection of citizens in their rights, but was also charged witii the preservation of their morals. Ho used the words of Washington when he said, ‘Be cautious how you indulge the proposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Education not only consists in the development of the intellect, but embraces moral training ; hence the necessity for the religious element. He did not use the words in any narrow or doctrinal sense, but with that, broader meaning which they would _all admit it bore—that of obedience to the Divine law. He admitted that denominational schools could not, for some years, be established with effect except at the centres of population ; but they had already been established in most towns, both large and small, with good effect ; and it would be wise of the Government to utilise those schools as they found them, provided they attained a certain standard to be fixed by the Board, and they were entitled to the aid which the Board might be able to give them. By that aid, schoolmasters would be multiplied and those who were at present working in that important field of labor would be in a _ more independent position. It would be manifestly most unjust to those who held that it was absolutely essential that religion should be taught in their public schools, that they should be obliged to continue the practice that at present existed of supporting schools by voluntary contributions, and at the same time he taxed for maintaining other public schools. They must not ignore the numerous petitions that had been laid upon the table of the House with respect to that question. He had the honor, not only of presenting a letter from the Bishop and clergy of the Church to which he belonged, and which also contained the signatures of Wesleyans, Presbyterians, and other religious bodies, but he had also the honor of presenting a petition from the Bishop and clergy of the Catholic Church. The House could not afford to ignore the petitions with which the table was covered bearing upon that subject, for they represented the views of a very large majority of the inhabitants of New Zealand.” Why, gentlemen, Mr. Pearce, according to the extract I have just read, goes further than I do. He seems to hold that it is the duty of the State to establish and maintain religious schools. Well, all I want to say is this, that if any of yon are induced by the reports spread about me, that I am not the friend of secular education, but that Pearce and Hunter are—that, in fact, Short; is not the friend, hut Codlin —if any of you, I say, should be induced to test me on that point, then all I want is that you should be particular in your inquiry to ascertain the views of those other gentlemen ou that particular point, lest, in - rushing to their arms, you may simply be rushing from the frying-pan into the fire. It would have been extremely easy for me to have avoided speaking on the subject of secular education, but I had no such desire. I do not aim at concealment of any views I hold upon this or any other subject. Ou the contrary, I thought as I expressed my convictions before that it would be only honest to the Corporation to state here what my convictions were, and to let you judge of the propriety or not, as you might think fit. (A voice : That’s what we want—nothing secret.) As to the native question, there was a time when the subject absorbed all, or almost all, of the public attention ; but now I hope to be able to dismiss it in a few words. In consequence of the policy of peace and the civilisation and education of the native race maintained under the able administration of Sir Donald McLean, I do not think it at all likely that native disturbances anything like what occurred before will occur again, but there are many questions which -.will crop up in connection with the subject still, and I think we should not relapse in our vigilance regarding it. There is, gentlemen, one other subject to which I will allude, and that is with reference to the constitution of the Legislative Council. I will give my support to the introduction of the elective principle in that Assembly. I am not one of those who decry that body. I have no objection to its members personally. On the contrary, I believe that they are conscientious gentlemen, and I know there are among them many able men. And I think that there has been a good deal of unnecessary censure cast upon that body for the rejection of a Bill, because it was the pleasure of the House of Representatives to submit it for their consideration at the fag-end of the session. It is well known that numbers of Bills had been delayed till a period in the session when the Council had no time to devote its attention to them. I will take, as an instance, the Queen’s AVharf Extension Bill. Looking at the records in Hansard I find that the Bill, after having received an airing in the House of Representatives, was introduced into the Legislative Council three days before the prorogation of Parliament. (Hear.) But I cannot conceal from myself the fact that it is unwise and impracticable to keep up the nominee principle in one branch of the Legislature. I believe it would be difficult to effect a change in the Home country, where the House of Peers has grown up from time immemorial, while many of its members are either hereditary, or have distinguised themselves by glorious achievements where all are distinguished by social status. The House is moreover rendered sacred by the traditions of centuries. But it is impossible to apply the same argument to the Legislative Council of New Zealand, and I believe it would be wise to introduce into that body some elective principle, not based on the same franchise as the House of Representatives, or for the same term of years, but to recognise that the Legislative Council should, in some way or other, be responsible to the people of the country. [Hr. Gisborne here referred to the report of a statement made by the Hon. Mr. Holmes, that he should object to Councillors being nominated by the Ministry, whereby Mr. Gisborne argued that Mr. Holmes, a distinguished member of the Tipper House, had shown himself to bo lamentably ignorant of the constitution of a body to which he belonged, inasmuch as the Council had been the nominees of the Government ever since it had been established,] Cue other subject I wish to refer to is the law relating to Eriendly Societies. It is well known that those societies exercise an important influence on the affairs of the colony. When we look at their influence for the good of the people, their extensive ramifications, their great usefulness, which extends to countless households, it is obvious that they should receive the attention and consideration at the hands of Parliament which their importance deserves. Owing to the position which I have held with the Government, I have been enabled to gain a considerable insight into the working of friendly societies, and I believe that the law as it at present exists is very unjust, and wants thorough revision; and if I am elected to a seat in the House of Representatives one of the earliest subjects to which I shall devote my attention is the law relating to these friendly societies, with a view to putting it on a more satisfactory footing. Well, gentlemen, the last subject I shall refer to, and that which I consider .the most important, is that of finance. Finance, as you very well know, is the life-blood of the body politic. It would be absurd in you to expect, or in me to attempt, anything like a financial statement on this occasion. This is not the place or time to perform such a task, and besides I have not access to the requisite information. I can; therefore, only indicate my general views. Now, the annual interest we are paying for the colonial loan is in round numbers one million pounds a year—about a twenty-third part of the interest) which Great Britain is paying for its national debt. Great Britain, with a population one hundred times larger than ours, and

with wealth how many times greater than ours he would not like to say, was paying in the shape of annual interest upon the national debt only twenty-three times as much as New Zealand. The ordinary or Consolidated Revenue is taken at about one million ami a half. The laud revenue , is taken at half a million, and both together come to tiro million. Well, the laud fund was subject to pay half of the debt and the Consolidated Revenue the other half. Well, out of the debt of two millions one has to be paid annually, and goes away to England ; and we. have to carry on the work of colonisation ami the administration of the country with the remaining million. Now, you raii-t remember that the laud fund is almost localised, but a certain amount is subjected to appropriation by the General Assembly for public works. 1 consider, gentlemen, that these are formidable facts, and facts which should induce us to pause and consider well our position. Xu speakiuv as I have done I have no wish to advert to any particular administration, and do not reflect upon the Colonial Treasurer’s system of finance. I am quite willing to admit that the Provincial system was continually jostling with the colonial, and the removal of the former would facilitate the reorganisation of colonial finance. But I stated in my address to the electors that the finance of New Zealand was unequal, improvident, and flurried, and to those epithets I adhere. I ask, are not the Customs revenues unequal ? Do not the duties, in some measure, press more heavily on the necessaries of life than on luxuries ? (Cheers.) I ask you is not the ad valorem principle unequal. Does it not offer a premium to the dishonest trader ? Again, is not our taxation generally unequal ? The resident settler provides for the cost of peace, order, and good government of the colony, while the absentee proprietor of laud draws an income from lands, the value of which is further increased by the cost which the resident settler has to contribute. Further, I ask is not oiir expenditure unequal ? In this very financial year there is a sum of about £BOOO of colonial money divided between Auckland and Westland, simply on the ground that those provinces are impecunious, and unable to carry on their own Government. Ido not say that it is their fault that they are impecunious, but it is our misfortune. It shows that there is something wrong in the state of affairs, and that there is a manifest inequality in the expenditure when those provinces which are not impecunious have to provide for those which are. We are simply living from hand to mouth on borrowed money. Look at the session of 187-1, when a loan of £4,000,000 was authorised. It was stated by the Minister of Finance, and, no doubt, sincerely, that the object of raising the £4,000,000 loan was not that it was actually wanted, but in order to provide for the contingencies of the - money market, and if the Loan Bill passed, the colony would be able to provide against those contingencies. What was the result ? The£4,ooo,ooo loan was raised, and actually two-thirds of the money spent three or four months after the negotiations were completed, and I believe the remainder will be exhausted during the present financial year. Then, with regard to my assertion that the finance of the colony is flurried, is it not a tact that changes have taken place sufficient to warrant me in saying so ? In the first place the provinces were empowered to borrow as much as they could get, and now the provinces are to he abolished. Directly the loan was authorised, the Treasurer went Home and scrambled through the negotiations on terms which may not be of advantage to the colony, and which are not yet clearly understood. W e are : now enjoying the sunshine of prosperity, but clouds are darkening the horizon, and I fear it may he soon that we shall have to face adversity and increased taxation, and we should therefore be prepared to meet it in time. What we want is revision of the Customs duties, and property income tax. I wish it to be understood that in any observations I have made of warning or caution, I do not desne to create any unnecessary alarm. Times of adversity must occasionally occur, but they should only serve to inculcate wisdom to stimulateour perseverance. I do not despair for a moment of ultimate progress. On the contrary, I feel as sure of it as I do of the appearance of the sun at noonday. I have every faith in New Zealand. I have faith in her boundless resources and her institutions, and above all I have faith in the intelligence and energy of her people. (Applause.) The Chairman stated that Mr. Gisborne would be happy to answer any questions the meeting might desire to put. In answer to a question as to what he thought of the Corporation Act at present in force in New Zealand,. Mr. Gisborne said: The Act is very voluminous, containing some 500 pages, and I do not know how many thousand clauses, and I must confess that I have not been able to make myself master of it. (Laughter.) No doubt it wants amendment. (Continued laughter.) I may, however, generally state that I approve of the elective principle in respect of corporations, the same to apply to the election of Mayor. (Laughter and cheers.) The Mayor and Councillors should be elected simultaneously by the people. Elector : What is your opinion of the prelimiting rating power ? , Mr. Gisborne : That is a different question, hut one to which, if elected to the office of Mayor, I shall devote my attention. An Elector: Do you consider that it is correct to canvass for votes when we have the ballot ? Hr. Gisborne : As an abstract principle, I have no doubt that it is wrong to ask for votes, as the ballot was introduced for the protection of voters, but I am afraid that it will exist nevertheless. (Laughter.) Elector : What is your opinion of the present mail contract ? Mr. Gisborne : Wellington should be the centre port for the distribution of mails ; and although I cannot at the moment commit myself to giving a definite opinion, still I think if possible, in view of the present arrangement, that.we should get rid of the San Francisco service and adhere to the Suez. There being no more questions put, The Chairman said the speech they had just heard appeared to be a very correct and satisfactory one. He would not, however, ask the meeting for a vote of confidence in the candidate because they had the ballot before them, and personally he considered it wrong for any candidate to canvass for votes. He would simply move that a vote of thanks be accorded to Mr. Gisborne for the manner in which he had expressed his views. After a brief interval, the Chairman said ho had perhaps made a mistake. _ It would be more correct for one of the meeting to propose such a resolution. Upon this. Dr. Johnston came forward and proposed vote of thanks to Mr. Gisborne for the lucid explanation of his views, and stated that he should give that gentleman his support, in consideration of his being the only candidate who had interested himself in the matter of the public health. Mr. Moorhodsk seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously. Mr. Gisborne thanked the meeting.