The Patea Mail. Established 1875. FRIDAY, MARCH 30, 1883. MAJOR ATKINSON’S POLITICAL ADDRESSES.

Patea Mail, Volume VIII, Issue 1015, 30 March 1883, Page 2

The Patea Mail. Established 1875. FRIDAY, MARCH 30, 1883. MAJOR ATKINSON’S POLITICAL ADDRESSES.

Major Atkinson’s two political addresses at Christchurch have been commented upon by many papers in the Colony. So far os can be seen; the main object of them was to avoid the reproach so plentifully bestowed by the Opposition in last session of Parliament, that the Ministry had no policy of their own, and were only a set of respectable, hard-working clerks. The Colonial Treasurer seems to want to show that he at least has a policy ; ,but he does not give much indication as to how far what he proposed was simply suggested on his own account, or was the Ministry’s settled plan of political operations. Perhaps we shall be safest in concluding that his expressed views are his own, but that probably he knows his colleagues will endorse most of them, for almost everyone is aware that Major Atkinson is the strongest member of the Ministry. The comments of some of the public journals on these speeches are curious. They are styled “ revolutionary,” and characterised as eccentric and dangerous. To any student of politics these are the last terms to be applied to the ideas expressed in the two speeches. On the contrary, there is scarcely anything new in them, except indeed the proposal to embody the compulsory national insurance scheme in an Act of Parliament, instead of merely discussing its advantages in a high-class Review, as the Rev. W L Blackley has in the -Contemporary. And even here, though there is novelty, there is nothing approaching the revolutionary. The principle of compulsory support of the poor has long ago been law in the Home Country and in all the Australasian colonies ; in England under the vicious plan of the English Poor Law, and in the colonies in the less objectionable form of State grants in aid of charitable institutions. Major Atkinson’s insurance schemes may be sound or unsound, practicable or impracticable, but they are certainly not revolutionary. They embody a complete remedy for pauperism, by compelling all men and women in the colony alike, when young, to insure their own lives for sums of forty or fifty pounds, so as to guard absolutely against destitution under any given combination of adverse circumstances. The compnlsory support of the poor and the disabled was in existence long before this, and Major Atkinson merely suggested a novel ! mode of carrying it into effect. Nor was there anything revolutionary in any of hisiotber proposals, certainly not in rendering, as he proposed, the Legislative Council an elective, instead of a nominated, body. The proposed alteration is in the Liberal: direction, but there, is nothing very , startling in it. It has been adopted in framing the Constitution of the neighbouring colony of Victoria, when the Constitution of that colony was, drafted by such men as Sir William . Stawell and Sir John O’Sbanassy, some of the very last men among colonial states men,', to be styled revolutionaries. And by the Berryites, or really revolutionary party in Victoria, the elective system has been objected- to, and the nominative plan of electing the Upper House, proposed in its stead, in order that the.Minislry of the day mighthave practically absolute power through being enabled at any time to swamp the existing Upper House by the creation of “ new peers,” It is true that some of Major Atkin-, son’s proposals are really open to hostile criticism in some particulars, but not on the ground of their being revolutionary. Thus, for instance, he declared himself in favour of small-sized electoral districts in the infancy of a colony,. but large constituencies when the colony had grown and become populous. Apparently the worthy Major had in bis mind the old Provincial divisions of the colony when he was thus censuring large electoral districts. And it was true that in the case of the nine Provinces the effect of those large divisions was to make the chief town the centre of all influence and patronage, to the great detriment of the Provinces generally. But this arose from the peculiar adjuncts of the old Provincial system, the absurd creation of a number of mimic kingdoms and minute Courts, with their hosts of small officials, who must all be stationed at one place. Indeed, Major Atkinson himself seemed to see that the system of small electorates is a mistake, because he called attention to the fact that in these small districts the qualities which recommend a candidate for parliamentary honours are not his ability or knowledge or honesty, but “ the amount of Government money he has got spent in the district.’’ There were some other defects in Major Atkinson’s views, which wc cannot, at present, for want of space, discuss in detail. His notion of the whole of men’s actions coming within the sphere of legislation was absurd enough, and, if carried out to its logical consequence, would give rise to religious persecution and communism. Altogether, however, we are not sorry he has spoken, if only because he has given people something to think abont on the principles of politics, before Parliament meets.