THE WAYS OF THE WORLD.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1272, 2 December 1884, Page 2

THE WAYS OF THE WORLD.

Mr J. H. Sutter has given an account of his stewardship to his constituents. He had spoken three times during the year, he said, and they ought consequently to be well posted in" political matters. Perhaps this explains the reason why so few were present. They probably know so much about politics, after having heard the hon. gentleman so frequently, that they think they cannot obtain any more information.

Mr "Wakefield appears to be Mr Sutter's pet aversion. Two-thirds of Mr Sutter's speech referred to the Member for Selwyn, and this fact naturally leads to the question: " Did the electors of Gladstone send Mr Sutter to Wellington to act as a spy on the actions of Mr Wakefield; or to watch the interests of their district?" If the latter, it was none of his business to hash up for his constituents every word Mr Wakefield said for the last two or three years.

Now, it was not necessary for him to -N tell the people of Pleasant Point how inconsistent Mr Wakefield has been. They knew it too well. But it was necessary for him to explain his own inconsistency. In 1881 he went in a strong bursting-up land-tax man, but supported a propertytax Government. In 1884 his policy included a property tax, but when Sir Julius Vogel put forth his policy, which in the firot case included a land tax, Mr Sutter forgot his hustings pledges, and voted for Sir Julius. At Pleasant Point he said he would support loans to farmers, and at the Washdyke, when he found himself elected, he said it was all a bubble, and that cheap money meant dear land. Last Saturday evening he told the people of Pleasant Point he had brought it under the notice of the Government, which statement I do not believe. He is a money-lender, and if it came to the vote I feel confident he would be against cheap money. On the hustings at last election he warned his constituents against excessive borrowing, as nothing of it would be spent in their own district, but he voted for spending about £1,000,000 on the West Coast harbors, for making the West Coast railways and for buying the district railways, etc., etc. These and many other actions show thot Mr Sutter can change his mind as frequently as Mr Wakefield. The difference between the pair is that Mr Wakefield's changes are bold, dashing and reckless, while Air Sutter's seem mora like the imbecile of one who is incapable of forming any opinion of his own.

Mr Sutter tried to justify his vote in favor of the District Railways Leasing Bill, and the way he went about it was rather amusing. He showed that an attempt had been made in 1879 to lease the Dis trict Railways, and that the proposals of the Stout-Vogel Government were far more, favorable than those of the Atkin sonians. On that ground he was in favor of the purchase. He was not in favor of it because it was an advantage to the colony, nor did he try to show it would be, but he was in favor of it because the terms proposed were better. It did not occurr to him that by waiting another four years the terms might be better still. He quoted from Mr Wakefield's speeches on the West Coast and at Leeston to show that that gentleman w;is in favor of leasing land at one place and opposed to it at another place. These quotations he brought up to justify his own vote, but what land leasing or selling has to do with District Railways is what no one but Mr Sutter can understand. 1 should rather believe that he had some money-ring friends who were interested in District Railways, He voted for the West Coast Railway, although he said the land through which the railway passed was worth nothing. This is not bad, too, but it is useless to try to knock " blood out of a turnip."

The first Ministerial pronouncement has a peculiarity about it worthv of notice. The great measure to which Mr Ballance g:ive first place in his speech was the Married Women's Propeny Act. Who ever heard or cared about this during the last election ? or when ciid the country demand it, to make such a fuss about itl What then is the reason why so much prominence was given to it. Simply this : Mr Ballance, like Mr Stout, is an advanced radical, and the Married Women's Property Act is a radical measure. Now this was the only little bit of their policy which Messrs Ballarce and Stout were able to carry through, and naturally they felt elated. They sold themselves body and soul to the conservative Vogel, and they had to do his bidding. This explains the prominence which Mr Ballance gave to the Married Women's Property Act. Of course the measure is one of which 1 thoroughly approve, but for Ministers who went in to remove the depression and make the colony prosperous to make so much fuss over so trifling a matter is little too much for me.

Apropos of the Married Women's Proper y Act, a woman in Christchurch, according to the Advertiser, has lent money to her husband and taken a bill of sale over everything he has. In a country where such things can be done it does not look as though the women wanted greater privdeges.

The Mayor of Timaru is a liberal advertiser. He recently got a requisition signed by a large number of ratepayers to allow himself to be nominated for re-election. He consented and was elected, and two days after the election he advertised the requisition. Coei O'Laktjs.