South Canterbury Times, TUESDAY, MAY 25, 1880.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2242, 25 May 1880, Page 2

South Canterbury Times, TUESDAY, MAY 25, 1880.

We have on various occasions attributed the sudden collapse of the Grey Ministry to the extraordinary want of unanimity on-important State questions that prevailed among its members. However much the special crochets of the individual elements of that badly assorted Cabinet may be admired or excused, , it is impossible to look back on their politicaljiistory without fervently hoping for the sake of useful legislation that such a disjointed omnium gatherum may never again preside over the destinies of the colony. However great or glaring the faults of the present possessors of office may le they will compare favorably with their liberal predecessors in that they work with a tolerable unity of purpose. If there exist dissensions within the Hall Cabinet they arc arranged where they are created. But in the absence of any clear proof to the contrary, we are justified in assuming that between the Premier and his colleagues a good understanding prevails. So far as the recess is concerned the members of the Ministry probably acting on the maxim that “ a still tongue keepeth a wise heart” have kept their counsels remarkably well to themselves. Most of the predictions respecting policy which have obtained publicity are mere guesswork, and to some of these foreshadowings the Premier has already given a distinct denial. On. one question wc are glad to be assured the present Ministry is sound to the core, —namely the question of national education. Sir George Grey made a most pointed attack on the Ministry the other evening in Christchurch, when he stated that it was their intention to tamper with the existing system of education, and to resort again to school fees, or local school rates. To this statement a statement of a most damaging character the Premier on the following night gave an emphatic denial. Wc admit that up to this time, wo had ourselves serious doubts as to the fidelity of tho Ministry on this important subject. The recent speech of His Excellency at Wellington, coupled with the fact, that the Colonial Secretary, Mr Hick, holds views that are strongly antagonistic to purely secular education, could scarcely fail to create uneasiness as to the future of tho Education Act, should any attempt be made by the present Parliament to alter or amend it. But the assurance of the Premier that tho Government has no intention whatever of modifying or irnparing the free and secular principles which form the backbone of our national system of educacation, and that in reference to this question the Cabinet and His Excellency arc severely at variance, cannot -fail to give confidence and satisfaction to the many in New Zealand who regard universal education as the keystone of the arch on which our national progress and prosperity, the result of emancipation from misrule, must, in the future, chiefly depend.

That the late Government were strangely divided on this question of education is obvious from some of the remarks made by Sir George Grey and Mr James Macandrew in their recent speeches. Both of these gentlemen assume to be leaders of the same party. They held almost a dual position as the two chief pillars of the late Cabinet. Yet on the important question of education their views would appear to be as wide as the poles asunder. Sir George Grey is a thorough philanthropist on this question. He believes that education should be universal and free, that the schools of the people’s children should be entirely supported by the State. Mr Macandrew denounces increased taxation on the ground that it is required “to uphold an educational system which the people of the Colony never sought, and which, in my belief, was not required.”

When asked whether he would bo in favor of the re-imposition of school fees? Mr Macandrew replies, “ Certainly ; I think their abolition was one of the grandest mistakes in the Act. Nobody wanted it, and I think they will have to be re-imposed, whether we wish it or not. I would go further, and give powers to localities to rate themselves for the purpose of erecting school buildings. This power ought to have been in our Education Ordinance long ago.” In other words, Mr Macandrew would have the public schools of New Zealand in the same position as the temple of justice, which he says “ cannot now be opened without a key having a goodly mixtui’c of gold in it.” W hen we mention that other members of the late Cabinet held similarly divided views on this education question that Sir George Grey and Mr Macandrew were the .representative heads of two factions within the Cabinet, and that on such subjects as representation, electoral reform, and triennial parliaments there were equally alarming differences, it will be perceived that the Grey Ministry was so ill-assorted that it was impossible for it to hang for any great length of time together. To judge from the speeches delivered by the members and supporters of the Grcy-Macandrcw party, wo arc inclined to think that the Education Act stands a much less chance of being tortured out of shape at the hands of the present Government than if it had to depend on the mercy of their predecessors.