Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

South Canterbury Times. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1882.

There is quite enough of the diplomatist about the Colonial Treasurer to render it necessary to keep a sharp look-out upon him. He is clever, but he strikes out in all sorts of unexpected directions. The flights of genius do not always tend in the direction of real utility, or where duty points, however. ' If the opposition have not effected much in a general way this session, they have at least preserved the country from trickery. Some days ago. Mr Shrimski moved the addition to the Loan Bill of a clause making it compulsory for persons, the value of whose landed property was enhanced by Public Works, to pay rates specially in return for the benefits so received. The Treasurer thereupon passing over the motion of Mr Shrimski, took up a similar one of Mr Hursthouse, raised last year/ and moved the suspension of the Orders of tbe day to admit of debate upon it. Mr Shrimski naturally felt indignant at tbe implied slight, and strongly protested his independence and his right to be beard, and gave quite a satisfactory account of the origin of bis motion. Tbisj however, was not so much a vital question as was tbe evident desire of the Government to go on with business in their own way, to postpone consideration of difficulties, and to in fact make their own position . the first consideration. For tbe Treasurer desired to remit this question of the incidence of taxation to a Select Committee, and in the meanwhile to go on with the Loan Bill S A light and airy way of doing things, truly—clever, and deceiving. But everybody was not to be hoodwinked. Mr Montgomery protested forcibly against any such postponement, which he rightly deemed nnworthy of Government. To go on with tbe raising of loans before it was settled how the incidence of taxation for repayment was to fall was unstatesmanlike and unworthy. Sir Robert Feel on one occasion (said the hon. gentleman) when desired to remain a Minister, while unable to carry his measures, replied:—“l do not consider the evasion of difficulties and the postponement of troublesome questions the carrying on of a Government.” Mr Montgomery put this analogous case before the Major with much propriety on this occasion. Mr Turnbull argued against the remission of the question to a Select Committee and was in favor of discussing Mr Shrimski’s danse there and then, supporting it himself on the ground that its adoption would really protect the Government, and prevent railways in all sorts of unreasonable places being forced on. If the taxation suggested by Mr Shrimski were enforced there would be far less danger of unwarrantable expenditure on unproductive railways. The result of the discussion, for it was hardly a debate, was that the question was finally referred to a Select Committee. The difference between the motion of Mr Hursthouse, and the danse prepared by Mr Shrimski is a very important one. The former is retrospective as well as prospective—the latter is only prospective. And it may safely be said that never did a more puzzling and obscure question come before the House than that raised by Mr Hursthouse. For suppose the incidence of taxation for public works expenditure to have been satisfactorily settled, so far as landholders are concerned there remains another fact. The immigration votes cost the country great sums.

A state of things in connection with the department of Justice which must be pronounced at least peculiar, was disclosed this morning at the R.M. Court. The Resident Magistrate intimated to the Bar that he had just been advised by telegram that the “Justice of the Peace Act” came into force this day, adding that be had received the Act itself a few days previously, whereupon two learned counsel informed His Worship that they had received no such intimation, and that they had made repeated applications, through, every possible channel, for copies of the Act without success , and they drew the attention of His Worship to the injustice under which the profession thus lay, inasmuch as while they might be pleading according to the old statute, the Bench would rule according to the new one. It certainly does appear that counsel have very substantial grounds for complaint against the authorities. Formerly it was the custom of the Department to gazette new Bills immediately they had passed all stages, in order that such a contretempts as this, might be avoided. Now it appears that no copies of new Acts will be available until the Book of Statutes is issued in its completed form. A remonstrance should, without delay be addressed to the Department on the subject; for the injustice of the thing is only equalled by its absurdity.

—and the immigration scheme provided a good living to many storekeepers—and why should these not (the principle of Mr Hurethouse’s motion being affirmed) be taxed accordingly ? Truly, the discussion seemed only to weave an additional webb of difficulty round the question; and to show the magnitude of the works which lie before legislators. If the contemplation of their magnitude ought to make the members careful, no less ought it to guide constituencies in their choice of representatives. For such complicated questions, in the discussion of which so many vistas open, demand the highest powers of the most thoughtful, trained, and experienced minds.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/SCANT18820905.2.7

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2947, 5 September 1882, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
894

South Canterbury Times. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1882. South Canterbury Times, Issue 2947, 5 September 1882, Page 2

South Canterbury Times. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1882. South Canterbury Times, Issue 2947, 5 September 1882, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert