South Canterbury Times, FRIDAY, MAY 21, 1880.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2239, 21 May 1880, Page 2

South Canterbury Times, FRIDAY, MAY 21, 1880.

Consideuable importance will, no doubt, be attached to the address delivered by the Premier to the electors of Selwyn last week, a resume of which wo published elsewhere. Paroly has the head of a Government had a bettor opportunity of bringing his argumentative qualities to the front than that which has been presented to the Hon. John Hall. He has heard the indictment preferred by the opponents of the Government, and he has had ample time to prepare a well conceived and elaborate reply. The address, taken as a whole, is disappointing. It is hardly the speech which, at a crisis like the present, should have emanated from the Premier of New Zealand. A largo portion of it consists of a singularly lame defence of the proceedings of the Ministry, a material fragment is taken up with personal explanations, and the portion devoted to the future policy of the Government is remarkably vague and badly compressed. The address, from beginning to end, displays a wonderful lack of candour, and an equally extraordinary abundance of disingenuousness.

The first portion is devoted to local questions. Of course the preface is a matter of taste, but for a Premier to introduce an address on questions of State policy by discussing the necessity for a bridge at Bobbie’s Ford, and an earthwork embankment at North Rakaia, seems to our view very muck like combining the sublime with the ridiculous, and putting the cart before the horse. From the important question of a post and telegraph office at Leeston, the Premier gracefully glides to a consideration of the bill of indictment presented against himself and his colleagues by their natural enemy —Sir George Grey. He tells his constituents that" Sir George Grey took umbrage at his (Mr Hall’s) jumping like a Jack-in-the-box from the Upper House to Jthe Lower, but he takes no pains to justify the somewhat indecorous proceeding. Next he alludes to the taunt made in reference to himself and some of his chief supporters that they were afraid to face a decent censtituency and- sought election at the hands of electorates that are no better than rotten boroughs. He contended that although he addressed but a limited audience, his speech was in reality made to the colony, and he referred to such illustrious examples as Benjamin Disraeli, Lord Palmerston, and Sir Robert Peel, who were in the habit of speaking to limited gatherings. It would, however, we submit, have been more to the point at issue if the Premier had endeavored to show why obscure little constituencies like Cheviot, Rangitikei, and other places which we might name, with only one or two hundred electors, should enjoy the same amount of representation as places where the voters are counted by thousands. This was the gist of the argument brought forward by Sir George Grey, and it is one which will undoubtedly receive the attention

of parliament and the country. That one man should represent two thousand electors, and another two hundred, is such a manifest absurdity that the agitation commenced for a redistribution of seats, will scarcely bo allowed to subside until representation on the fair basis of population is secured. The reference that has been made to the rotten-boroughs of New Zealand may bo in the opinion of the Premier “ rubbish ” but if we are not greatly mistaken, the “ rubbish ” will prove a very fertile kind of material when the next general election arrives.

Passing over the vain-glorious allusion to. the Premier’s ambition to be a useful public servant, and to place “ a few stones in the edifice of national prosperity ” which the property tax is about to erect, Mr Hall proceeds to defend the Government against the charge of ransacking the telegraph office for political telegrams with the object of damaging their predecessors. The odium of having instituted this inquisitorial investigation is placed on the shoulders of the member for Cheviot, Mr Alfred Saunders, and the responsibility we believo could hardly find more congenial quarters. This telegram sore is an old one, and it might have boon better if sleeping dogs had been allowed to rest. But since the matter has been brought up wo believe public sentiment will uphold us in expressing the opinion that while certain members of the Grey Government made an improper use of the wires, tbeir successors in prying as they did into the secrets of the telegraph office were guilty of conduct that was the reverse of honorable.

As regards future policy, the Premier is not nearly so explicit as wo anticipated. On the question of taxation he is particularly obscure. His defence of tho property tax is simply impotent. The chief objections to this iniquitous and unprincipled imposition arc not approached. The old song that direct taxation is necessary, and revenue must be raised is druimbed into the cars of the electors. Reference to the Income Tax is studiously avoided. This question of taxation, however, is really the question of the day, and however reticent the Premier and his colleagues may be on subject, the electors of New Zealand will not be contented until the whole system of revenue raising is thoroughly overhauled, and the saddle is adjusted to the shoulders most capable of bearing the burthen.