Suppressed Despatch of Sir Julius Vogel.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume IX, Issue 976, 7 September 1881, Page 6 (Supplement)

Suppressed Despatch of Sir Julius Vogel.

t following is Sir Julius Vogel’s ippressed despatch,” which was trued to him by the Government: — 1 The Hon. the Premier, Welling- : Sir, —In continuation of my er of’the 7th, I have now the honor further reply to your letter of the > of December, in which you are k! enough to tell trie 'that the Go•ninent regret that I thought it eessary, out of my own podket, to y certain officers the amount which ■ six months, they would lose by the eration of the reduction of the ten r cent, on their salaries, and in lich you also express the opinion that e last paragraph of my letter to rich yours was a reply, was uncalled

“ I am not disposed to suffer cenre without defending myself, and »u must therefore excuse a very frank ply on my part. In both cases you elter the Government behind Pariment and make it appear that I have uninit ted an offence against the lat•r. I cannot, however, admit this ew. A Government is responsible >r the legislation to which it submits, nd should not remain in office if Parament forces on it measures to which knows it cannot give effect, or of hich it disapproves. It is in the very ssence of the constitution of Parliament that the Government which ias means of information at its ommand not open to individual nembers, should interfere to prerent wrongful legislation. I assert vith the utmost respec: that the Government had the means at its comnand of knowing that the vote.

: or the Agent-General’s Departnent was not sufficient to meet its engagements, and also that it had the means of knowing that the reduction of 10 per cent, from the salaries tf Civil Servants was a straining of Legal and moral obligations. Her Majesty’s Civil Servants of the Colony of New Zealand enjoy the protection of certain Civil Service Acts. It is contrary to the spirit of those Acts that the salaries of those officers should be reduced, unless for misconduct. The Act of last session, providing for a reduction of 10 per cent, of their salaries, was a denial of the engagements under which the Civil Servants held their appointments. No further proof of this is wanted than the ininriaus effect of the measure on the

rights which have grown up to retiring allowances. Besides, as I have said, reductions of salaries, except for misconduct, are quite opposed to the intention of the Civil Service Acts. The mode of reduction of expenditure contemplated by the Civil Service Acts is by the superannuation of superior, and the promotion at reduced salaries of inferior officers. The only alternative to the Act of last session possessing the character I have indicated is that it was a deliberate seeking out a class of the community fora special income tax of 10 per cent. Whichever of the two views be taken there can be no question that the Civil Servants were entitled to express their opinion concerning it. The Civil Servants are not the servants of this or that Minister, but the servant of Her Majesty, amenable to legal and constitutional control. They are not servants to be subjected to injurious proceedings without even the right of remonstrance. When I am censured for an act which was really meant to

shelter the Government from disaster, I reply that I regret that I did not adopt more energetic action. The Government contemplated large reductions in the service, and in this respect were quite within their rights. Nothing can be more reasonable if retrenchment cannot be dispensed with. But the Civil Sertants, with the knowledge that the Government contemplated wholesale reductions, were cowed into passively accepting the 10 per cent, reduction, for whoever desired to abject might reasonably expect that lie would be one of those who would l>e altogether dismissed, me say that during the last four years there is scarcely a country in the world which has not suffered seriously from depression and diminished revenue, but the only country which I know of which lias taken a similar course with regard to a reduction of the Civil Servants is Turkey. II maybe that the example of that country is one that is creditable to follow : but at the same time it must remembered that the Civil Servants not eiijov the protection of the Cri* and the reductions,

even in Turkey, were made under the exigencies of the ultima ratio regum. “ When the vole of £3OOO was accepted as sufficient to pay the cost of the Agent-General’s Department to the 30th of June of this year the Government had the means of knowing that, consistently with the fulfilling of engagements, it was not sufficient. I Iw’ill proceed to prove this. It was directed by a letter dated the 10th of September, and by a cablegram, which preceded it, to take 10 per cent, off all salaries from the Ist of October, and I was told that the cost of my department must not exceed £3OOO a year, made up as follows : —AgentGeneral, £1350; secretary,. £600;

accountant, £3OO ; clerks, £350 ; ; messenger, £4O ; rent, &c., £360 ; total, £3OOO. It was thus made to appear that the vote was adhered to, but seeing that the reductions were in < no case to commence before the Ist of October, there were the six months’ extra expenditure from the 31st of March to be added. Then as to the items. I pass over the questionable taste of asking me, who was holding office for the convenience of the Government to accept a reduction, as I am willing to believe this was an act of inadvertence. The secretary was in receipt of a salary of £BOO, and by your figures it was to be reduced 25 per cent. Seeing that this gentleman came Home to fill the office, and that he enjoyed the protection of the Civil Service Acts, such a reduction was in my opinion amenable to a very strong expression. The accountant’s salary you reduced by 40 per cent., regardless of the enormous magnitude of the responsibilities attaching to his onerous position, and finally the rent and contingencies set down at a sum less than you were advised was the rent that was payable over a long lease. It is true I had intimated it might be practicable to sublet a part of the offices, but clearly this could not be done at a moment’s notice. I considered I was bound to give effect to your instructions, and I did so ; but I did not think that I, as a Civil Servant was precluded from freely expressing my opinion that the action taken was , unconstitutional. I subjected myself to personal sacrifice. I knew that to persons enjoying small incomes a ’ sudden reduction of a large proportion [. of the same must be highly inconvenient and painful, and 1 felt it would g not be to the advantage of my departr ment that meritorious gentlemen connected with it should run the risk of subjection to embarrassment.

“ My answer would not be complete if I did not examine into the plea of necessity. The Government admit that the Civil Servants were by the action taken, subject to hardships. One would think such an admission sufficient, but the hardship is sought to be justified because of the State’s necessity. I cannot but think that the Colony has suffered greatly from a melancholy view taken by the Government of its capabilities. As I have already remarked, New’ Zealand w as not singular in the depression that overtook it. I do not think that during the last four years any country or Colony has escaped suffering from the wave of depression which, with astonishing uniformity, has with more

or less energy rolled over the entire world. It was reserved to the Government of New Zealand to take the singular course of prostrating itself before W’hat common-sense should have told it, which, if not exaggerated by panic, would soon be at an end. That which was coming was obvious enough and provision could have been made to meet it. After the five million loan was negotiated the expenditure should have been somewhat contracted. I am aware that the Government spoke of liabilities having been entered into for works, but such liabilities could easily have been distributed over a longer period. For the rest the Government seemed to anxiously instil a want of confidence into the minds of the people with no other apparent object than to stop the policy of public works and immigration, and to deprive the Civil Servants of the incomes they were entitled to. After all, beyond

the comparatively small reduction in the ordinary revenue, which could have been met by the re-imposition of the tea and sugar duties and other remedies, not of a prejudiced nature, the worst that had happened was that the sales of land were postponed. The land still remained, and with patience was sure to recover its value and demand, It was open to you to do that which almost every civilised Government had done— postpone the deficiency till the crisis was over. You were not threatened with any difficulty

in obtaining money. The loan agents suggested your obtaining what you required in Australia. The experience of the late Victorian loan showed that, had you acted on the hint, you must have succeeded. Later still I cabled you a plan by which you could obtain money, and as you did not entertain it, I presumed you found • you could meet your requirements in some other and better way ; but the fact is, and there is no denying it, that what the Government wanted was to persuade the people they must give up their Colonising policy. I do not for a moment suppose the Government were not sincere in believing that it was for the best this should be done. They

looked at it from the view of the large landowners who, having obtained the railways they wanted, were fearful of possible future direct taxation., To a certain extent these views secured their own fulfilment, for the credit of the Colony was depressed to an extent that threatened a breach of all confi-

dence in it. Fortunately, sensible men in this country saw through it, and refused to believe in the bogey repudiation, which, if not actually paraded, was hinted at in the back ground. Had the alarm of the Government been fully echoed here, it is impossible to exaggerate the gravity of the disaster that might have been occasioned. The financial institutions of the Colony are of course, in emergency, liable to the heaviest State taxation, and a run might have taken place on them, the end of w’hich to persons of property in the Colony could not have been foreseen. A Government should be something beyond a mere routine department. It should have the ability to devise and the boldness to execute whatever the interests of the State require. Instead of being overawed by the difficulties which New Zealand, in common with other Colonies and coun-

tries, was meeting, they might have seen that the time had arrived when the grand opportunity had come for New Zealand for which it had been laying itself out. Since 1870 the Colony had been preparing itself to become the home for a large population. It had said by its policy if the means of communication be opened there is room for millions of people and millions of capital. When, so to speak, it had placed its house in order a convulsion was occurring in this country, the consequence of which was to drive thousands and thousands of persons possessing the means and the knowledge most wanted in the Colony to search out for themselves new homes. Just when New’ Zealand might have had these in any number in company with practically unlimited capital, the Government so decried the Colony that reluctantly they looked for another home than that of the ‘ Great Britain of the South,’ to which , their eyes were fondly turned. And so the policy of Colonisation is at an t end, and the spectacle is presented of the Government concentrating all its energies on disputes with the Natives [ just as in the time proceeding the era - of Colonisation. History repeats it- - self. We have in 1880 a repetition of r the condition of 1869.

“ To return to the Civil Servants. How could the Government, w’ith any show of consistency, indulge in such gloomy lucubrations when it saw its w r ay to exact from its servants a reduction of 10 per cent, of their incomes ? The Civil Servants of New Zealand are worse paid than in other Colonies of equal standing, and far from being an exceptionally rich class, there is reason to fear they are the reverse. If they could live through such taxation, what was to prevent a similar course with other and wealthier classes ? Far be it from me to recommend such a thing, for, as I have already intimated, vexatious taxation at a time of exceptional depression is, to say the least, a mistake ; but what excuse is there for regarding such depression w’ith panic-stricken eyes when a comparatively poor section of the community can, in addition to the other burdens, bear an income tax of 10 per cent., exacted, too, without the delay w’hich usually follow’s the imposition of similar taxation. “ The Government have censured me for a mild protest against the exceptional legislation by which I was injured in common with the other servants of Her Majesty. In my own self-defence it has become necessary to combat the plea by which the Government sought to make me responsible for disrespect to Parliament. I have shown also how strange, from a legal and moral point of view, is the action which has been taken, and I have disposed of the plea of imperative necessity. Whilst treating of the

last subject, I have spoken >to the Colony rather than to the Government, for I fear the latter will not profit by my remarks, but I trust they will not be denied publicity. “ My health and circumstances forbid my returning to reside in New Zealand to take such part in public affairs as my fellow-colonists might wish to confide to me ; but I should be insensible to and ungrateful for the many marks of confidence the people of New Zealand have reposed in me, did I hesitate to express opinions w’hich may be of some humble service to them. I cannot fail to remember that for seven years, with the break only of a few weeks, I was continually in the Government, and that I did not retire because of the wish of the people, or of Parliament, —I have, &c., Julius Vogel.”