South Canterbury Times, WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 15, 1880.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2417, 15 December 1880, Page 2

South Canterbury Times, WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 15, 1880.

The towns of. Geraldine and Tcmuka, though- not very widely apart, are singularly divided on political subjects. Portions of the same constituency, they run in opposition harness. When the Property Tax was .under discussion? meetings v ere held almost simultaneously in the two places. Tcmuka vigorously opposed the now burden, while Geraldine supported the Government proposals. The member for the Geraldine district has recently had some practical experience of this singular want of harmony. On Saturday night lie was howled down at Tcmuka, while on Monday evening' ho was jnst as vigorously cheered by the people of -Geraldine. Of course the different receptions will he ascribed to a variety of causes. Some will say that the results were due to the chairman, others will argue that while Mr Wakefield's popularity has declined in Tcmuka it is in the ascendent in the neighborhood of Geraldine. It is unfortunate for the district, and it must he annoying- to its representative that two villages which should work together like a pair of greys in harness should clash as they do. Air WakchehPs constituents arc evidently anything but a happy family, and this perhaps accounts for the extraordinary tacfics that arc adopted in approaching them. In using the expression “ extraordinary tactics ” we are alluding to Mr Wakeliehl’s latest chairman. The introduction of a clerical chairman at a strictly political gathering is certainly a novelty. We mention this with all due respect for the liev G. Barclay, who presided over the Geraldine gathering. Air Barclay, though a clergyman has an undoubted right to preside over any properly constituted and legal assemblage, ambit must be acknowlogcd that the way in which he acquitted himself at Air Wakclield's meeting was highly creditable to the reverential emotions of Ins promiscuous political (lock. But presuming that the inhabitants of the town of Geraldine are politically a happy family, we v.re led reluctantly to think that the clerical chairman was not exactly a happy family idea. Wo have seen a dog at a public meeting and a cat in a cage of monkeys, hut they do not look happy, .AuU u vOL.gvniu.. N,,, v ....... at the buck of a member of Parliament, reminds us of a square peg in a round hole. I t seems to us a loss justifiable innovation than the consecrated organ or the sncredotal fiddle usurping the functions of the superseded precentor, Not that there is anything very incorous in the clerical chairman presiding on the political platform, but it represents a combination of church and state which is hardly in accordance with that sense of fitness and order of which the founder of the temple at Jerusalem wrote so strongly. Order, it is said, is “heaven’s first law,” but the clergyman holding the holm at a political gathering is usually a danger signal—indicative of turmoil and the necessity for oil on the troubled waters —and wo are sure the well-behaved people of Geraldine did not deserve such an expedient. But if the liev. G. Barclay’s presence as chairman at Air AVakcficld’s meeting was not altogether in strict accordance with popular notions of political etiquette, it must he acknowledged that he made an efficient chairman, if he did not grace the throne. The meeting, like all public meetings, contained the inevitable drunken man,and the reverend chairman managed him hotter than any ordinary constable. AVhenever an in-' tcmiption occurred he recognised the voice, if he did nut see the speaker, and naming the cause of the row he imperatively called him to order. Oibouc .occasion he somewhat diverted the audience, lleferring to the disorderly proceedings at Tcmuka he remarked that he “hoped they were not going to repeat heaw, the scenes that occurred cdsewheaw,” an observation that was followed by a loud “ heeaw! hceaw !” from the body of the room, and a titter of derisive but indecorous laughter. But the Eev. Afr Barclay, nothing loth to air his cloth at a meeting of electors, handled them with the adroitness of an experienced tactician. He kept order and oven silence by that kind of moral suasion which is exercised on Irish tenants when they hesitate about paying their rent. Air Barclay threatened the noisy ones with an immediate eviction, and as there was no need for a process server the threats had the desired eJfect. There was another and still greater innovation than tint of selecting a clergyman for the lay platform at this Geraldine meeting. The unusual course was taken of naming the proposer and seconder of the vote of thanks and confidence. Possibly this part of the -programme was neither rehearsed nor prearranged, ortho clerical chairman knowing the natural bashfulfulness of his auditors may have acted the part of a prompter. But it was a serious innovation notwithstanding, and it detracted somewhat from the honor and glory of the unanimous vote which was passed.

It will seem to those who have perused Mr WakeJield’s speech that his political ethics, like the ways of provi-

dence, are somewhat inscrutable’. They certainly seems most perplexing. By his own showing lie is able to distinguish right principles from wrong ones, but he does not adhere to the right. He says that the present Ministry is composed of honest men, and they' can always count on his vote in a difficulty. This is damning the Ministry with faint praise. He says they are honest, but he has a poor opinion of their ability. They are a decent team of bullocks, hut they' must he driven, and as they are not Mr Eollcriton’s cattle, it is no use swearing at them in Greek. But if the .Member for Geraldine’s opinion of the Ministry is a poor one ; his apology for the Upper House and the honorariums of its members is infinitely' worse. The members of that House are poor, and as they do useful work, correcting the blunders of the Lower House, it would he uncharitable to deprive them of their perquisites. In effect, lie regards the Upper House as a sort of Benevolent Institute, whose only redeeming quality is that it is useful as a laundry for washing the soiled linen of the House of Representatives. Air Wakefield, by his own frank admission, is constantly sacrificing principle to expediency. Ho does not do what is right, hut what is convenient. Although opposed to the property tax lie voted for it. Alajor Atkinson’s financial scarecrow frightened him out of a sense of propriety, and although he did not believe in direct taxation he supported it. Another reason for acting as he did was that he disliked the land tax, and in choosing between the property tax and the land lax lie selected the least of two evils. Ho hold that the country' should not bo taxed, while the highly-favored and wealthy' denizens of the towns, who contribute little or nothing in the shape of taxes cither to the general or local revenue, escaped. Ami thus, while Mr Wakefield disapproved of Alajor Atkinson’s financial remedies, he swallowed the mixture for the sake of expediency. In the same way' he disapproves of the present education system, although a member of the Education Board. It seems hard lines, and inconsistent, for a representative to administer what he does not believe in. Here, again, we have an illustration of principle being sacrificed to expediency. Mr AVakefield may' call this versatility, but it is not giving practical effect to his precepts. Perhaps when lie next addresses his constituents he will endeavor to explain away these eccentricities, or rather inconsistencies.