POOR MEN AND THE PARLIAMENT.

Oamaru Mail, Volume IV, Issue 1289, 25 May 1880, Page 2

POOR MEN AND THE PARLIAMENT.

TO THE EDITOR. OF THE OAMARTT MAIL. Sib, —Wealth and Liberal ideas go hand in hand. Only rich mer* are worthy of a seat in Parliament; only large block owners ought to rule the country ; they [alone can'honestly vote on a national question. It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a poor man to give an honest vote, because of the temptation to which he is exposed to accept a bribe in the shape of a billet. Mr. Reid expresses himself clearly on this point, He believes in retrenchment, and j in the abolition of the honorarium, because it would keep poor men out of the House, and introduce a better class of men, Mr. Reid is too good for this Colony altogether. He should go to Russia, where his Toryism would be rewarded with nobility and the Order of the Iron Cross. Mr. Reid opposes job railways, but his " tongue is tied" on the subject of district railways. He, however, believes that those interested in this piece of Government jobbery will be satisfactorily answered just after the election. He 'is forced to deny himself the pleasure of giving his opinion on the question of the Government taking these railways over. What a sop for the Hakateramea electors? Those who vote for Mr. Reid will do so on the following itgms ; A tax upon beer, the abolition of the honorarium,, cheap labor, class representation upon a basis of wealth, the construction by Government of district rail-* ways through private lands, local option, and purely secular education. The result of such a policy, if it were carried out, would give the Colony a shoddy aristocracy, degraded and pauper working classes, and institutions founded upon worn out theories.—l am, &c., YoX Populi.

TO THE EDITOR OP THE OAMARU MAIL. Sib, —I am a "poor man," and so, sir, are many others, and really I must object to the gratuitous insult offered to me by Mr. Reid at his meeting on Saturday night, when, speaking on the question of the "honorarium," he said that he thought a parliament consisting of rich men would be preferable, because, '' sometimes a vote was worth a good deal, and might prove a source of temptation to a poor man," thereby infering that rich men were above temptation, and that poor men were not honest men. Now, sir, I consider that I am just as honest a man, though not as rich as Mr. John Reid. And if Mr. John Reid considers in his own mind that the poor man—and the majority are poor men—is necessarily dishonest and a rogue, then, sir, I declare most emphatically that Mr. John Reid is not fit to be a legislator. For it is manifest that he would only legislate for the benefit of his own class, rogues being out of the pale of beneficial legislation.—l am, etc., Elector.