Untitled

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5340, 9 May 1878, Page 2

It is not every day we find a ‘writer who has the.courage to make an attack on long-estabr lished ideas, or to attempt to undermine or overthrow old and time honored institutions. We have been taught to look upon party government as a part and parcel of, or very clo-sely allied with the very nature of our political constitution. Yet wo find this timehonored' notion j vigorously attacked in a series of letters which have recently found place in our columns under the hearting of - “ Party .Government.” In giving those letters to the public, we have adhered the- practice of laying open our columns; as * a medium for' the expression of the various shades of opinion, and the free and full discussion of all public questions. We learn that these letters have secured for themselves considerable attention, as well for their own merit as because the question discussed has at present special interest, when an attempt is being made to substitute personal rule for party government. ’ A war cry has in good earnest been raised by the Premier, echoed by many portions of our Press, and judging from the effect produced by the orations of that hon. gentleman on large public meetings, has been re-echoed by numbers of the people. That cry is—“ Death to conservatism,” whatever that may mean, and no quarter -to ■ be given or conditions to be accepted short of the most--.-complete triumph and establishment of the new form of “liberalism.” In order to the accomplishment of. all this, the writer thinks that the people are invited, and not only-invited but urged:in the most eloquent, pathetic, and patriotic language, as the only means of obtaining deliverance from oppression and preserving their liberties for the future, to rally round and support at all hazards not the present Government, but the present Premier, Sir George Grey, the great apostle and preacher of what Sir William Fitzherbert calls the gospel ofdemocracy. . We at least are not prepared as yet to believe with this writer that the Premier ignores tho existence or repudiates the assistance of the other Ministers in- this work ,of reformation, because we see he sometimes refers to the members of the Cabinet, in a patronising way, as his colleagues. ‘ But for all that it is obvious to “ Q ” that he regards them only as so many adjuncts to himself, having no separate or independent political existence. His appealsi to' the people are hot so much for the support of amy, particular policy or party as for the support of the individual Sir George Grey. It has never before occurred in our Parliamentary history, that any person as the bead and, ruler-has been so prominently brought forward, to the overshadowing of the men, his colleagues, as is the case at present. On a vacancy occurring in the representation of any constituency, they great question does not now appear to be —is the candidate for political -honors an honest-hearted, - large-, sbuleil, * high-minded patriot a believer in progress and , a worshipper of evenhanded justice,—but is he for Grey? This pledging of inen blindly to follow and.’obey'an individual, instead of dispassionately discussing and dealing- with -each separate question, as it arises, on its merits, is strongly condemned by the writer, as 7 being out of harmony with the genius of society as at present with .us constituted, as being contrary to the spirit of the Constitution, obstructive to wise and sound. legislation, arid as an abnegation of independent judgment and action—the inborn right of every Englishman, —which every one who assumes the responsibility of • a representative in Parliament is; expected to exercise. The writer supports his views bn- the subject by references to society as presented to us in everyday life, and by copious illustrations from party action, and its obstructive tendencies in the New Zealand Parliament. Tile question thus- opened up is one well wqrthy of ’ consideration and the fullest discussion,- especially in view of what appears to be regarded as a danger which now threatens, when the personal government from which in 1853, after a long and terrible struggle, New Zealand was freed, may in another and more objectionable form he re-established by the misguided force of ,the “ popular will.”

In another . portion of our columns will be found the copy of a letter from the Hon. Mr. Maoandrew, Minister for Immigration, to the Hon. Sir Julius Vogel, the'Agent-General of the colony, London, on the subject of sugar manufacture in New Zealand. Mr. Maoandrew observes that it is proposed to pay a bonus of £IO,OOO towards a commencement of the undertaking. The soil and climate of >many portions of these islands are well adapted to the growth 'of beet, and it is believed that it could be produced in sufficients quantities for the; manufacture of a great part of the sugar required for home consumption. Although formerly the growth of beet necessitated the employment to a great extent of high class labor, and thus prevented the production of sugar ,at; such a price as 1 would successfully compete with the imported article, this is not .the case now, when our agriculturists are bringing the best mechanical appliances, with all their improvements, to bear upon the oulti- 1 "ration of the soil. Mr. Macandrew remarks that it is difficult to oyer estimate the prospect held oht towards affording a comfortablet subsistence to many thousands ? of industrious families in this colony by the prosecution of this industry,; and he < asks Sir i Julius! Vogel to bring the matter under the notice of leading capitalists connected with the business of sugar refining in London. ! The scheme is likely to prove successful if properly set on foot. It has been brought forward on several former occasions, and Sir Julius Vogel, as some of pur readers may remember, devoted great labor and attention to the subject, and produced a complete and elaborate history of the cultivation of beet and the manufacture ofsugar, which was laid before Parliament, and printed in 1876. Recent advices from the old country tell us that every day the attention of : small' farmers; arid agricultural laborers is being more frequently .directed to this colony, , a?; offering a better:prospect for themselves and their children.than they can ever hope for. at Hoinei where hard times are again the order’ of the day with that section of the British population which is specially attached to the soil, and loath to quit it so long as they can make a bare living. To such persona as these New Zealand would bo a paradise, where agri-' cultural laborers who thoroughly understand their work, and practical farmers with ’a small capital, can hardly fail to succeed. It may be that ion the growth of.beet and manufacture, of sugar thousands of these persons might here live comfortably, and indeed in affluence compared to what is their lot in England, Ireland, arid Scotland at the ; present moment. For great and prosperous as the old country is, the position of her .agricultural laborers and small farmers is for the most part: a : hard struggle with poverty. ■

It may be interesting to many of our readers, and certainly to'all who are familiar- with' Hawke’s Bay topics, and remember the debates of last session in reference to the Te Ante Trust Estate, to know that after a considerable, amount of negotiation and correspondence with the Bev. Samuel Williamsi'tHe lessee of the property, the following settlement has been arrived nt trustees have agreed to give Mr Williams a fresh lease of the estate for seven years, at a rental of £IOOO a yeriv, the lessee undertaking to lay down 500 acres in grass, and to erect, ten miles'of. wire fencing. At the expiration of the above period Mr Williams is. to, have the option of a renewal of the lease for another seven years at £IBOO a year. In* coining to this arrangement , the lessors have, we understand, been greatly influenced by the importance of the Kev. S. Williams remaining _to superintend theM schools in connection with the trust. The settlement arrived at may be regarded as a satisfactory! one, .arid, will ibe in accordance with the view of the Parlimontary committees, who-took great .trouble: over the matter, and spent a great deal of time upon it.

At a committee meeting of the Chamber of Commerce yesterday the letter .of Mr.Maoandrew relative.fo direct,pteam, communica-, tioh with the niother'country (which appeared, in our issue of the ! 3rd ihst.) was brought under' .discussion., There w»s]*'we hear, a difference of.opinion as to whether it would bo advisable to abandon the Californian service. Some of those present considered that the expenditure involved in jts maintenance jwas not recouped by any return of equal value. . After some further remarks ' it was ! resolved to postpone tho further consideration of the matter until the .next monthly,,meeting. ...The question is one'of great importance to tho public,'and: the Chamber will no doubt bear, this in mind on arriving at*any decision on tho matter. There is another point in connection with the suh--ject which also should not be lost sight of, and bdheorning which Mr. Macandrew’s letter is ambiguous and unsatisfactory, viz., which 'of

the New Zealand ports the vessels ought to come to, should the direct line of steamers be ultimately adopted; and in reference to this we think theydi.can be no doubt whatever.