The Standard AND PEOPLE'S ADVOCATE. (PUBLISHED EVERY WEDNESDAY AND SATURDAY.) SATURDAY, DECEMBER 5, 1874.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume III, Issue 228, 5 December 1874, Page 2

The Standard AND PEOPLE'S ADVOCATE. (PUBLISHED EVERY WEDNESDAY AND SATURDAY.)

SATURDAY, DECEMBER 5, 1874.

"We shall sell to do man justice or right: W e shall deny to no man justice or right: We shall defer to no man justice or right.”

Sir George Grey has tendered a second edition of his patriotic advice on one of the most important questions and at one of the most critical periods in the history of New Zealand. Now that such great constitutional changes are contemplated, as the abolition of the Provincial form of Government; and while public attention is being directed seriously to the benefit to be derived therefrom, it behoves the Press of the Colony to speak out boldly, each according to its lights.

From one who has so long represented Imperial Authority in this and other Colonies, much sound and salutary counsel might reasonably be looked for; but, although we have perused with some care, Sir George Grey's petitions, first to the Governor anent the abolition of Provincialism, and, second, to the Superintendent* of Auckland, relative to the Land Fund, and the compact of 1856, we fail to discover in the mass of propositions, statements and somewhat irrelevant sentiment which abound in them, anything worthy of adoption or consideration ; and for aught the manifestos are likely to accomplish, they might not have been written at all. The petitions, however, exhibit considerable research and knowledge of state matters ; and from the apparent earnest manner in which their prayer is put forth, we will not be so uncharitable as to believe that Sir George has adopted that course, single-handed, in any but what he considers to be the best interests of the Colony. Much, however, as we are disposed to respect his views, and to give him credit for sincerity in these matters, we cannot refrain from remarking that it appears unaccountably strange that Sir George Grey should have remained so long a passive spectator of the financial embarrassments and struggles of the Northern Provinces, and especially the one in which he, himself, resides, when it was in bis power —as he would have us now to believe—to make such valuable suggestions, as wonld tend to lessen the difficulties which those Provinces have hitherto had to contend with.

. ince his retirement to Kawau, Sir George Grey has studiously kept aloof from any active participation in the public affairs of the Colony, although, probably working unobstrusively in other directions for its benefit. During the past eight or nine years Sir George Grey has calmly—at any rate quietly—witnessed the gradual failure of Provincialism, and for which he now stands forth as a detertniued

■’d vocate. Whence this new-born zeal r f Sir George takes alarm so readily at the coming death and burial |of the Provinces, why did he not apply hi diagnosis during the long years of their leeline? Why have left the application of his remedy until the disease has rendered total extinction inevitable ? The obvious fact is that the recluse of Kawau has espoused a bad cause ; and, although a few interested persons may homologate Sir George’s opinions, and hail his advent into activ life as lhe salvation of their cause, he will find it difficult to disabuse the public mind of the belief that he is making political capital at the expense of the public good. No one knows better than Sir George Grey that several of the provinces have for years past been in alanguishingcondition, andowe theirsubsistenee to the bounty of the Colonial Exchequer. Auckland has been, and is, in a worse condition than any other province, and would have collapsed long ago, hut thatshehas made a kind of loaf ing friendship with the mammon of political unrighteousness. It is utterly unableto carry on public works; it cannot meet the ordinary engagements of its Government; the outlying districts are crying for bread, and they don't get even the proverbial stone. Nevertheless, Sir George Grey is petitioning the powers that be to prolong the existence of this state of things, in the hope that the influence of his name will outweigh the arguments of the people against it. We shall proceed, briefly, to enquire into the cost of this luxury—Provincialism- The Colony is divided into nine provinces, whose total income is, according to recent data, something like £1,400,000, (exclusive of contributions to the consolidated revenue) nearly 40 per cent, of which, or about 66s per head of the entirepopulation,is said to be deducted for salaries and honoraria of an army of some 800 officials, and 242 Provincial Councillors. With such startling facts before us, none but those who are wedded to Provincialism beyond hope of divorce can be found bold enough to assert that the time has not arrived for its abolition. Men of Sir George Grey’s stamp, who may be said to belong rather to the past than to tbe present—men who are too conservative for the rapid strides of a young and vigorous Colony —are notable for their aversion to change of any kind in either statesmanship or politics. According to them all attempts at alteration, or improvement, to meet the exigences of growing necessities, are innovations that must be put down with a high hand—thus an enlightened and progressive people are clogged in thenaction with the worn out theories of generations and circumstances that have passed away. In a recent issue we published a letter addressed by Doctor Shaw of Dunedin to the New Zealand Times, in which Sir George Grey’s theses were analysed, and their fallacies exposed in a masterly way. Doctor Shaw, who is well versed in constitutional lore, and an able writer to boot, quotes appositely from the highest authorities in England and the Colonies—including Professor Stubbs of Oxford, and Professor Hearn of Melbourne—to prove that neither the Constitution of New Zealand, nor the Constitution of any other British dependency, is that rigid and unalterable production which Sir George Grey labors so hard to prove it to be; but a measure whose form may be varied at any time “ to meet the changing and developing “ life of the Colony.” It would be the height of absurdity to suppose that a form of Government incapable of either alteration, or amendment, would be tolerated in any British Colony ; and more particularly a form which claims to be a “ responsible ” one. Happily for the Colony Sir James Fergusson has replied to Sir George Grey’s petition to the Governor with characteristic emphasis. He has told Sir George, in the most unambiguous language, that his petition cannot, under the circumstances, be laid before Her Majesty’s Government and we may, therefore, hope that any further pursuit of this Provincial phantom will be abolished.