THE REUNION QUESTION.
■ . > (TO THB EBITOB, OP THE TIMES.) Sir, — Doubtless many of your_ readers, ! as wel I as myself, have been expecting to see iv your columns some report of the proceedings of the Otago Provincial Council touching the union question. In fact, seeing we have deliberately placed the future destinies of our Province under the control of that Council, we might be supposed to be deeply interested in its whole proceedings during the late session. Tour contemporary, the News, seemed to feel itself— and justly sounder special obligation to furnish the community on our side of the Mataura with some brief report of the proceedings of the said. Council in regard to the union of the two provinces, and accordingly gave us first Mr G-illies's speech in introducing the motion in favor of union ; again, briefly, the resolution , itself; and lastly, and tardily, an admission of the fact that the Otago Council did not honor the question with a debate at all. There are some facts, however, in connection with the manner of dealing with the question of union by the Otago Council, as well as its general proceedings, which the public here ought to be made acquainted with. There is, firstly, the fact that a motion for a dissolution of the Council to give the constituencies an opportunity of expressing themselves upon the union question, a3 well as upon other important matters, was carried by a large majority, but Mr Macandrew, apparently afraid to trust himself again with the electors, declined giving his assent to that resolution, and °excused himself for so doing by advancing the most trumpery possible arguments, one of which was the assertion that the constituencies at the election three years ago had the question of union brought before them, and must be considered as having then given their deliverance upon it. A more flimsy evasion of a constitutional duty could not have been advanced, for although the question of union of the two provinces had been then brought on the tapis, certainly it was viewed as to its attainment as one of remote interest and, moreover, only secondary to the election of Mr Macandrew himself. Seeing, therefore, the electors of Otago are suspected of having changed their opinions as to the merits of Mr M. himself, we might suppose it possible they may have changed their minds on the union question also, at least the question ought to be put to themselves for an answer. Again, it ought to be more prominently brought before the public here that the motion in favor of union wasmet by an amendment proposing delay in its consideration till next meeting of Council, and that in a house of twenty-five members, 11 voted for, and 14 against this amendment. After this the original motion was carried on the voices, but the strength of the respective parties was indicated by the first division.^ This did not show great unanimity in favor of union in that Council ; and this fact is lamented by the Otago Daily Times in a leader the day after. But the resolutionitself is somewhat suspiciousin its phraseology. " This Council' concurs ._ . . generally with the views expressed in the Commissioners' report." This is certainly not the unreserved adoption of the Commissioners' report which unionists like Mr Johnston insisted upon. Approving of the clauses of that report generally, leaves some exceptional clause or recommendation to be dealt with by the dissector's knife at the proper time. Under this qualified approval the Otago G-overnment sends the question into the Assembly, where, well knowing she is much the strongest of the two provinces, can deal with the details with a due consideration to her own interest. It is most curious to notice how unionists in Otago have set themselves to prove the advantages of union from their point of view, by using arguments diametrically opposed to those used by unionists on our side of the Mataura. Here the resources of the province were depreciated by every means, and attempts made to show that we were getting the best part of the bargain. In Otago the resources of Southland are extolled, and proofs forthcoming that Otago is making a splendid bargain by union with Southland.' Mr Gillies declares our railways to be worth all our debt, and that if they had been properly managed, we might have run a race with Otago. The Otago Daily Times, in the article already referred to, remarks, in reply to the arguments against union by a correspondent — "If Southland were an unpeopled waste, it would have no debt, and such logicians as our correspondent would on that ground clamor for its annexation. We should think it a decidedly better bargain to take Southland as it is — trammelled by debt, it is true, but possessing an industrial population certain to increase, and wbich, when increased, will reduce the debt to insignificance. The large area of private freehold in that province appears to us to be one of the surest guarantees of its future prosperity. In connection with this subject it should not be forgotten that Southland is decidedly ahead of all the other provinces of this island in regard to the proportion of land which has already passed under the plough, to each head of population. At the beginning of the present year there were in Otago 3£ acres per head under crop, or broken up for crop ; in Southland, the proportion was 5f acres. This is a matter of no small importance in its bearing upon the question before us." By way of following up the arguments of our Otago friends, _ I may remark that in Southland the proportion of money spent on public works per head of population, by the last annual returns, is much greater than in Otago. The figures are as follows : — Otago, to per head of population, £3 18s ; Southland, £5 14s. There was much made by some unionists of the apparent fact that, seeing the debt of Otago was so much less per
head than that of Southland, we should be proportionately gainers by the consolidation of the debts of the two provinces. The figures, however, which I have given above, show that the supposed gain is more apparent than real. The amount actually spent on public works, in proportion to the population, estimated by its numbers and industrial claims, is a better test of the value of a government to the people at large. There are some statements also specially interesting to us, which came out in the discussion which took place on the emigration question in the Otago Ccuncil. Great expectations were encouraged here as to the tide of emigration which was to set in in our direction through the influence of union with Otago. Let g us see what prospects the Otago Council has as to the ability of the province to promote immigration for the future. Mr Macandrew having — without legal authority — appointed two emigration agents, and his government fancying they might secure the vote of a member of Council on the hundreds question, and so retain their seats, proposed to appoint another, a Blr Burns, a member of the House. Upon this a debate ensued, which it would be well to transfer to your columns. I will submit a few extracts. Mr Eeynolds, one of the Union Commissioners, who assisted in propagating the idea down here, that upon the Southland and finally the Otago Provincial Councils adopting the basis of union, the public here might expect an immediate flow of the expected and promised benefits ot that union in the shape of an advance of funds — which Otago was represented as abundantly possessed of — to pay off our floating and pressing liabilities, and to promote the settlement of our province every third emigrant ship or oftener was promised to call at the Bluff with immigrants — expresses himself as follows as to the funds in the Otago Provincial Treasury available for the purposes of local necessities, let alone immigration or the payment of our floating debts: — " He did not see where the funds were to come from to enable the G-overn-ment to encourage immigration to any extent." . . . . " His conviction was, that if it was even possible at the present time to engage an emigration agent, he did not think that the prospects of the province would warrant it. He looked to a time of great depression, and to the Government encountering great difficulty to provide the necessary funds for ordinary purposes and public works." " Mr M'Dermid said it seemed the G-o---vernment were not alive to their position, or they would not dream of inducing immigration, much less of sending an emigration agent home. By their own showing they were drifting on to ruin, there being every probability thatin a short I time there would be nothing in the Treasury.'' Several members expressed j themselves in a similar strain, when the proposition to appoint Mr Burns as an Emigration Agent, to act on behalf of the province in Britain, was negatived. Judging from the general proceedings of the Otago Council, I am afraid our hopeful unionists will have to chew the cud of patience for some time to come. With others, I have no doubt these proceedings are calculated to induce a feeling of satisfaction that we have still the management of our own affairs, and might still remain free from the control of Otago Superintendents, Executives, or Councils. I therefore adopt the motto of an antiunionist in Otago, Better Eve Sit than Eve Plit.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ST18700114.2.12
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Southland Times, Issue 1195, 14 January 1870, Page 3
Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,587THE REUNION QUESTION. Southland Times, Issue 1195, 14 January 1870, Page 3
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.