The Southland Times. MONDAY, MARCH 19,1866.

Southland Times, Volume III, Issue 230, 19 March 1866, Page 2

The Southland Times. MONDAY, MARCH 19, 1866.

It is a world-wide acknowledged fact, that when an individual or a country slides by carelessness or misfortune into difficulties, all interested are anxious to determine in their own minds how the calamity arose, and not unfrequently form hasty and illmatured conclusions. Southland was plunged headlong into difficulties, and consequently arose the feeling that all the evil was owing to misgo vernment. That this in a measure is true it would be folly to deny; but that it is wholly true, no thoughtful mind could ever agree. It must be acknowledged that a conglomerated mass of circumstances united to produce the retrogression which has reduced the Province to its present position. Still, as is usually the case, " one idea " has taken possession of the public mmd — the conduct of the railway deoartment has, according to popular belief, been the cause of all the evils of the present — that from tbe commencement of that enterprise, everything that has been done has been a series of blunders, and . that the Eailway Engineer has been the chief of offenders. A fair and open investigation of all things connected with the railway works is required. The feeling that the Government has been remiss, and not displayed the caution and business capability essential to the efficient working of the public service, will never be allayed until the railway -question has been thoroughlyinvesti* ga,t?d, and the facts pf tbe case plainly

these opinions, we viewed with satisfaction the indications which were given at the commencement of the session of the Provincial Council of a determination on the part of many ofthe members to make the railway question the question of the session. The discussion has led to a Ministerial crisis. The Ministry have resigned on the vote of censure moved by Mr. Cuthbebtsojst. That motion was a distinct and positive "want of confidence " resolution, and being carried, of necessity the Ministry then" retired. We cannot but think that the question was hurriedly brought on and hastily concluded. The grounds upon which the motion found favor appears to be, that certain claims made by the Eailway Engineer for " extras," were unreasonable and unjust. The evidence elicited would justify the conclusion that the claims made are excessive and unreasonable. We cannot, however, excuse the Council for the vote of censure which they have passed upon the late Grovernment. The argument that the claims made by the Eailway Engineer should have been ignored altogether and not submitted to arbitration, but firmly resisted, is sound, if the starting point had been determined. This was not done. The Government merited censure for having made a mistake in not urging upon the Council last session the necessity for the appointment of a select committee to thoroughly inquire into the matters in dispute, and afterwards left the Council to decide the course to be pursued. The G-overnment, so far made a mistake. All the doings of the Eailway Department demands investigation, but that investigation should have been first through a select committee of the Council, and when the report was brought up, the Government should have been instructed how to act. The public mind is agitated upon this question, and in justice to the Eailway Engineer as well as to the people, a full and fair investigation must be obtained. Still, the " want of confidence " was premature and objectionable. It is clear that the Ministry had very little to do in the matter. They simply carried out an arrangement which their predecessors haJ. made — attempted to settle a complicated in a way which, at all events, had tacitly been endorsed by the Council. It may have been a mistake but it certainly did not merit the censure which has been passed. It is one of the cardinal points of Governmental morality that an incoming Ministry shall not repudiate the acts of their predecessors, however much they may condemn them. Erom the documents read it is patent that the late Government did little more than that required by political etiquette, and parliamentary custom — they merely carried out the contract of a previous Government. The dismissal of the Ministry under these circumstances is unfair, unparliamentary, and unprecedented. Had the Council appointed a select committee with power to call and examine witnesses and report upon the railway transactions in particular, and the conduct of the Government generally, all parties would have been satisfied. This was the legitimate courseto be pursued, andthe one which should have been adopted long sinee — it is the only parliamentary and dignified line of action which a legislature can follow, and the only one wliich can give public satisfaction. We have no positive information who are to be the incoming men, but whoever they may be, the railway question must command their immediate and thoughtful consideration. Insinuations have been thrown out and charges made which must either be proved or refuted. That Governmental blundering has been the conspicuous characteristic of Soutliland administration from its birth, is an indisputable fact. Who has been the chief of blunderers is yet to be determined and any Ministry which may now be formed will not have the confidence of the public unless they are independent and impartial — men who have not been accessories to the mistakes of the past — men who, with no party surroundings will aim to fix the errors committed upon the right shoulders, and place before the public a truthful statement of what has been done — especially in railway affairs — in the past, and make plain the nature of the system, if system there has ever been, under which Southland has hitherto been governed. Not men who, having sown the seed of evil would now desire to father the "poison-tree" upon others. Let a thorough investigation of all public transactions be made, and it is not unlikely that the late Ministry will not be ranked as second best. If we can read aright the documents produced on the occasion of the debate, that Ministry took ofiice at a very difficult period. They received from their predecessors as a legacy a mass of complications and disputes — the Province was insolvent, its credit destroyed, w& questions of contract

into in a sort of conversational " chat" between the "Herculian Administrator" of Southland and the clever men who sought his patropage. In short that whatever their mistakes may have been, they have arisen from an attempt to do honorably what their predecessors had undertaken. It is highly desirable that as 'the Eailway question isnowfairly before the public, Mr. Cijthbebtson, if he should form a Ministry , ought at once to initiate an investigation of a most searching character. This is all important, and no excuse of " inconvenience to country members " will justify or even mitigate the crime of postponing it until next session.