Untitled

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5479, 18 October 1878, Page 2

It is with some reluctance that wo again notice the Ministerial diatribe in their yesterday morning’s paper, but as the passage referred to makes a distinct charge which is certainly unfounded, we may be excused. The writer says;—“The second sub-section of the 18th clause was struck out, and the Council adjourned. We shall bo curious to see the result of this amendment in the other branch of the Legislature, but meanwhile, the debate has been instructive, as proving that the * Lords’ are developing very strong partisan tendencies.” The article from which the extract is made complains of the course adopted by the Upper House both in regard to their treatment of the Land Tax Bill, which they passed under protest, but without alteration, and of the Electoral Bill, which they amended. Every speaker almost was prepared to accept a general property tax, and the chief objection' made to the proposed tax was that it would prove partial in its incidence, and was founded upon a vicious principle; because it both abandoned the fundamental rule of taxing ailment in proportion to their ability to hear taxation, and because it created an nntaxed class which! would exercise power in imposing taxation. It would be unnecessary to repeat this but for the fact that the article under consideration asserts that the hon. gentlemen of the Upper House “ were unwise in allowing it to he seen how bitterly they resented the measure.” This assertion will he readily negatived by any person who has read the report of the debates. Having touched in passing upon this second misstatement, we propose to examine the charge of partisanship brought against tho Council We have vainly examined all the speeches delivered, in the, hope of finding some trace of partisan ship. On the contrary, bo far ae the Land Tax Bill was concerned, not_ a single member could be-found to help “the lame dog over the stile,” or even to assist the lame style of defence adopted by the hon. and gallant gentleman the Colonial Secretary. The difficulties of tho position at present occupied by Colonel Whitmore command our sympathy. Ho stands forth alone to defend measures which in his heart he must disap. prove. He finds tho Government measures attacked on all sides, and even when passed, so covered with obloquy that even thoir weak defender must wish that such well abused Bills might bo introduced and upheld by thereeponaible authors of their being. The partisanship in regard to the Land Tax Bill began and ended with one man-Colonel Whitmore. It is true that thathon. gentleman belongs to the Ministry in office, but it is very doubtful whether he can be said to belong to the party in power. Dissensions in the camp are, as we see, so rife that the first question asked about a division in the Lower House is—How many Ministers voted on each side ? In the Upper House it seems likely that if a division had been taken on the Land Tax Bill, and members had disregarded questions of political expediency, and voted simply according to their avowed convictions, wo should have to record on the list of ayes Colonel Wkitmobm first, “the rest nowhere.” This is undoubtedly a new phase of partisanship. Unless the Government, as is indeed most probable, desired that the Legislative Council should play into their hands by rejecting a Bill which was declared to he a necessary part of tho fiscal policy, it seems strange that Ministers should complain that what they asked in the way of a tax upon land was agreed to by the Council without a division.