The Patea Mail. (Published Wednesdays and Saturdays.) WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1879.

Patea Mail, Volume V, Issue 465, 8 October 1879, Page 2

The Patea Mail. (Published Wednesdays and Saturdays.) WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1879.

Sikck the result of the No-Confidence debate has been known, the debate itself lias lost what little interest it ever possessed. Bnt it will not be forgotten so eagerly as its predecessor was, because, nnlike that predecessor, it was not too late for its funeral. Like the Prince Imperial, it died at the right moment for its fame. There is a suspicion that, warned by the frightful example of the former debate, it “ wilfully sought its own salvation,” bnt it shall, notwithstanding, be “ buried in Christian burial,” and that speedily. Our reference to it shall not exceed the compass of an obituary notice.

There was some dissension as to who should move the Address in Reply. As it was hollow, and light, it was thought that Mr Masters would be equal to setting it going, and that Mr McOanghan would bo a worthy seconder. But the latter gentleman hails from the land where the astute heathen observed, “ No Macee, no gettee,” and was quite unprepared to follow in the wake of a man who, however masterful, had no prefix to his name. Mac. would move the Address, or have nothing to do with it. Bnt Sir George has little respect for titles, however exalted, and setting both Masters and Mac. aside, found a Mae. after his own heart in Andrews, the mechanic of Christchurch. This gentleman moved the Address in a speeeh more remarkable for thanfnritsdepth. He showed that if he was not very long-headed, he could bo long winded on an occasion. He was followed by Mr Hurst, whose lack of wit was also above the average, and who was cheered when he sat down. At this stage, the assembled patriots, out of sympathy with the Address, began to feel empty, and consented to refresh themselves. After this process was complete, Mr Hall moved his amendment, to the effect that the Ministerial gun wanted a new lock, stock, and barrel. He then proceeded to inform the House that Government had made some promises. No one, of course, would have believed this, had he not been armed to the teeth with facts. “ Had they not said they would save £IOO,OOO a year on the public service ? Had they not fulfilled this promise by spending first £B,OOO and then £15,000 more than their predecessors had done ? As to the present year, £IOO,OOO would probably not cover the increase of public expenditure. It was true that the Government had shown the sincerity of their wish for retrenchment, by proposing to reduce their own salaries. Bnt it strangely happened that one Government supporter moved an amendment, and another seconded it, and the disinterested proposal of the Government was lost. But a virtuous Ministry was not to be baffled in this way with impunity ; the two officious ones should feel the weight of their displeasure—they were both gazetted J.P.’s. For ordinary people, this disgrace was sufficient, bnt was scarcely adequate in the case of the pachydermatous supporters of the Government.” This is the essence of a part of his speech, which, at least, made the House merry. He went on to condemn the native administration, the conduct of Hansard in not reporting the Premier’s Financial Statement, the Government system of advertising, the neglect of prisons and lunatic asylums, and finally the using ot the machinery of Government to influence the elections. Mr Hall noticed the use made of the telegraph, and the Hinemoa. He inquired pathetically why, for the sake of fair play, the Stella had not been lent to the Opposition. He also dwelt touchingly on the ingratitude of Napier in re-

turning Oppositionists, although the Government had started driving the pi'n-s for a bridge in Hie neighborhood several days before the election took place. All this, and more, he said very quietly, lie did not perform any gymnastic, pugilistic, or athletic feats, but, having something to say, said it; knocking down no light arguments with a heavy hand, as he docs not drive carpet tacks with a sledge hammer. After Mr Hull came Sir George, who in the course of an hour or two, said “ You’re another,” and “ Did ever anyone hear anything so ridiculous ?” After the Premier followed Mr Saunders, who being the object against whom the gallant Colonel had hurled tiis private telegram at public expense, was listened to with interest while he gave the Govornmontabitofhismind. He was especially hard on them for being all things to all men during the elections, and he brought down the House when he ceased to be original, and took to reading Hosea Biglow : “ Ez to my principles, I glory In hevin’ nothin’ o’ the sort ; I ain’t a Whig, I ain’t a Tol3’, I’m jest a candidate, in short.” &c.

Mr Speight, who spoke for the Government when the matter came on next day, said he could have framed a better indictment against them himself than Mr Hall had done. Colonel Trimble said he had been a Liberal and a Radical for the last thirty years, but yet he could not support Sir George Grey. The Hon Mr Gisborne accused the Opposition of wishing to steal the Government policy, and the credit of it; but, would the House trust the splendid measures proposed by iSir George Gn-y in such bands? “Would they leave their wives in the care of Brigham Young?” Among other champions who followed was Mr Seddon, the successor of the lamented Barff. He has the gift of lungs, and splits the ears and affrights the souls of the galleries with dumb shows and noise. He has a fiendish spite against the letter ( n,’ and if a few more such pairs of lungs were engaged in assaulting the Queen’s English, it would speedily become a dead language.

Thus the debate was kept going until Friday night, the speakers being for the most part new members; but if tlie speakers were new, it cannot be said that the speeches were so. But the speeches were a very secondary part of the debate, which was carried on vigorously in the lobbies and in private rooms. Happy, or at least honoured, were the doubtful members during thojo days. The staunch supporter of either sid'e was nobody, but the doubtful men found the rails they sat on seats of dignity and power. Especially was this the case with Masters and Mac., who, if they could not move the Address, felt that they could move the Government j and no doubt they Winked at each other as they walked into the Opposition lobby, and left the Ministry in the minority of two. Both these men were returned to support the Government; and although they ‘ratted’ to the side that we support, they are none the less ‘ rats; ’ and, having already played double with their constituents, deserve the contempt of honest men. It is somewhat singular that parties should bo so evenly balanced in the House. Had a Groyite been present for the seat held by Sir George at the Thames, there would have been a tie in the house, counting the Speaker on the side of his party. Or, again, had a member of the Opposition been in the chair, there would have been a tie without the Thames member. Supposing Mr. Hull to form a Government, and all the members to stand firmly as they voted in the division, and supposing that Sir George retains his seat for Christchurch and gets a follower elected for the Thames, then Mr Hull will have a majority of one, and any member of his party will he able to defeat the Ministry by the simple and common process of‘ratting.* But it is not to be supposed that things will continue as they are. Some of the defeated party will be sure to feed themselves released from their allegiance to Sir George by the defeat he sustained, and will make a working majority for Mr Hall. Besides this probability, there is the possibility that, on account of the splitting of the Liberal votes at the Thames, Mr Whitaker may be returned, and the farther possibility that Sir George may lose his seat for Christchurch. Should these things take plac *, Mr Hall will have a chance, but the Re-constructionists would still be dangerous opponents. There is one view of Sir George Grey’s present position, which wo have not seen alluded to yet. It is that when he was in opposition ho issued writs against the Ministry for holding office illegally; and his party talked against time to prevent, if possible, the passing of the Act of Indemnification. If, then, it should appear that Sir George Grey cannot legally hold the seat for Christchurch, what pains and penalties will he suffer for having held the Thames seat in last Parliament after having been first elected for Auckland City ? If he had no legal seat, neither could he legally hold office t and his acts while in office are not legal. Bnt, on the other hand, the fact of theprecedent having been allowed to pass at the last election, strengthens his case for Christchurch.