SIR CORI O'LANUS INTERVIEWED.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1651, 25 October 1887, Page 2

SIR CORI O'LANUS INTERVIEWED.

In a copy of the Pall Mall Gazette which came to hand by the last mail we find a report of an interview which Mr Stead had with our distinguished friend Sir Cori O’Lanua. Mr Stead describes Sir Cori as slightly above middle height, with dark hair and beard well tinged with grey, and then goes on to give a report of the interview as follows: Mr S.: How did you get on in Bulgaria, Sir Cori ? Sir C.: Not well. You have heard of Stambouloff ? Mr S.: Yes, he came suddenly to the surface recently. Sir C. : Not at all; he has only changed his name. You have heard of Blufenoff ? Mr S : Yes. Sir C : Well, Bluffeuoff and Starabouloff are one and the same. He changed his name to emphasise his hatred of me. Mr S. ; How does the change of name do that ?

Sir C.: I have already lived in Bulgaria, and there every Englishman is known as John Bull. Bluffeuoff changed his name to Stamp-bull-off (spells it Stambouloff) to signify that he intended to Stamp-bull off: that is, stamp me off. Mr S.: Do they put you down as an Englishman in Bulgaria ? Sir C.: Certainly. Stambouloff raised that cry against me ; and another cry be raised was that I was once a member of the Parliament of New Zealand. That settled it. In Bulgaria they think that to be a member of the Parliament of New Zealand is next door to being a member of an association of Italian brigands. He also brought up the question of the Princess. Mr S.: What Princess?

Sir C.: Well, some years ago I lived in Bulgaria, and a very charming princess honored me by showing me gome attention.

Mr S.; A love affair ? Sir 0.: I am, and was then, a married man, Mr Stead, and you can easily realise that consequently the subject is a delicate one, All lam going to say is that when I went back this time I ascertained that shortly after I left there the Princess died of grief. Stambouloff brought this up. In a speech he delivered when proposing Prince Ferdinand as Prince of Bulgaria he characterised me as a heartless scoundrel who won the young lady’s affections, and then deserted her.

Mr S ; Ihe people of Bulgaria elect their Prince, do they not ? Sir C.: Yes; that is what took me there. ouc of two millions of electors one million and three-quarters of them signed the requisition to me, and they meant to elect me right enough, but this Stambouloff raised such cries against me that I was defeated. I know, however, that Ferdinand will make a mess of things, and that next time they will be glad to get me. Mr S.: You intend to stand again ? Sir C.: Certainly. They will not tolerate Ferdinand long at any price. Mr S.: Have you ever been a member of the New Zealand Parliament ? Sir C.: Certainly not. Please contradict that in the Gazefte. I find that here in England that even is a disadvantage to me. I think that is about the worst accusation made against me. I never came down to that level yet. Mr S.: What public service won for you the honor of knighthood ? Sir C.; I will explain to you how I got that title. In a weak moment Sir Robert Stout accepted a similar title, and the democracy clamored against his acceptance of it. He saw that in accepting it he had made a mistake, and he looked around him for some excuse, He saw no one more popular with the democracy than myself, and he said to me, “There is only one thing can save me, and that is that you should accept knighthood also. If you do that of course I shall have a good excuse. Anyone may well be pardoned for following your example.” I saw the force of his argument at once. I accepted the title to save Sir Robert, and that is the whole secret of it.

Mr S.: I hardly understand you. Am I right in inferring from your utterances that titles are unpopular with the democracy of New Zealand ? Sir C.: It depends upon whom the title is conferred. If a heartless inhuman scoundrel, who has risen to wealth and influence on the ruin of others, by gridironing land, and other questionable actions, is knighted, every one says he is fully entitled to it, and they bow and scrape to him. But if an upright, honest man, who has through life fought the people’s battles at great personal sacrifice, is similarly honoured by his Sovereign, the democracy affect to regard it as very little less than a very heinous prime,

Mr S.: That is very remarkable. In fact, I can hardly realise it.

i Sir C.: I am not at all astonished at that, because you do not understand the exact condition of the co’ony. The man who sacrifices himself in the interests of the people in New Zealand draws upon himself the hatred of the wealthy classes, These wealthy men watch the man of the people closely, and the moment they fitid the slightest ground for complaint they rail against him with all their might. The unthinking masses take their cue ftom these. Let a cry be raised at Auckland against a popular man and next day it will reach the Bluff, aud though it were the most groundless accusation,

ever made half the population will believe it because a wealthy man said it, Mr S.: Have you noticed that Sir Robert Stout has been defeated ? Sir 0.: I have, with feeling* of profound regret. Mr S.: What do you think of Sir Robert ?

Sir 0.: That he is an ideal leader. He stands head and shoulders above all. New Zealand: not so much in point of ability as in earnestness and honesty of purpose. He is a man of stainless character, his great heart is brimful of the milk of human kindness. Like Davis’s ideal patriot, “ H« served hie country, and loved his kind.” Mr S.: What do you attribute his defeat to ? Sir C.; To the cause of bad Government in England brainlessness. Mr Gladstone extended the franchise to the working men of England, and the first use they made of it was to turn him out of office. Rascally landlords raised the cry “Home Rule will ruin the Empire Gladstone must not win,” and the newly enfranchised working men cried “ Hear, hear,” and voted against him. They used the great gift of the franchise to defeat the giver of it, Sir Robert Stout fell a victim to similar thoughtlessness. There are no landlords to speak of in New Zealand, but there is a worse class there the Money-rings. These hate Sir Robert, and knowing how easy it was to gull the unthinking, they raised several cries as follows: —First they said“ He has accepted a title. He is now aa aristocrat.” Working men said" Hear, tear.” Second, they said: “We want the Bible in schools. What is ruining the colony is that we have not the Bible in schools.” Working men said “ Hear, hear.” Third, they said: “He would rob a poor man of his beer by extending local option. ” Working men said “ Hear, hear.” Fourth, they said: “He would ruin the colony. He must be turned out.” Working men said “ Hear,hear” and cheered, and out they turned him and put in his place a youth worth £IO,OOO a year. The villainy of the money rings and the brainlessness of the people defeated Sir Robert Stout. Mr 3.: I am surprised that such is the case in a country which has had the great advantage of having Sir Cori O’Lanus writing for its Press so recently. Sir 0.: My dear Sir, I am the biggest fool amongst them. Mrb.: Now I see it. I doubted you all along, but now I see you are “ taking a rise ” out of me.

Sir 0.; I can assure you I never spoke more seriously in my life. The fool at whom all other fools laugh must be the biggest fool of all. That is exactly my position. I have frequently thrown out hints and made suggestions that would be of everlasting benefit to the people, but my schemes never suited the money-rings, and they called them “ fads,” and the thoughtless people who would have benefited by them said, “ Quite right, they are fads; O’Lanus is a fool!” And the monopolists went away— With their thumos up to their noser, And their other fingers waving, laughing at how easily they galled their dupes. If a man suggests what will suit the money-rings he is right enough, but if he suggests anything antagonistic to their interests he runs the risk of a straight-jacket in Sunnyside.

Mr S.: lam surprised that such is the ease in a democratic country like New Zealand

Sir 0.: My dear sir, you cannot call people free who allow themselves to be the slaves of prejudices. Take, for Instance, the case against Sir Julius Togel. Ninety-nine out of every hundred men in New Zealand are prejudiced against Sir Julius Yogel, but not one of them can give any reason for it. Mr S.: I thought Sir Julius Yogel was a power in the land. Sir C.: Sir Julius would be a power in the House ofCommoos. He would not he a nonentity in a Parliament composed of the greatest politicians of the age, but the prejudice against him is intense. Mr S.: Can you account for that ? Sir C.: I can. Sir Julius belonged to the Conservative party originally. He was nine years absent from the colony, and when he returned the Conservatives looked to him as the only man capable of saving the colony. Sir Julius Yogel went into partnership with Sir Robert Stout, and promised to make the colony progress by “ leaps and bounds.” The Conservatives disgusted at Sir Julius associating with Sir Robert raised the cry that he was the cause of the depression. The cry was taken up, and it was believed by all. Some designing Conservatives who wanted to undermine Sir J ulius Vogel’s influence raised it, and the unthinking repeated it without examining whether it was right or wrong. That is the cause of our misfortunes—thoughtlessness. The people do not think; they allow themselves to be led by the nose at election times.

Mr S.: Are you going back to the colony, Sir Cori ? Sir S.: Certainly. I shall look around me and then return. I have not seen a better country. It is unequalled. Mr S.: You went more capital in it?

Sir 0.: Not at all. Of course, capital would be very useful, but what we stand most in need of are brains. We have borrowed over 99,000,000, but we hare not a penny

of it now. “ A fool and his money soon parts.” There is untold wealth lying beneath the surface of the country, requiring only the application of labor to render it useful. We hare any amount of labor; there are thousands idle in the adjoining colonies readjr to rush in if we wanted them, and capital can be thus got quickly if we put our shoulders to the wheel. It would, however, he useless to say so in New Zealand. If you say anything inconsistent with ideas that are 100 years old you are condemned at once. Mr S.; How is it they went in for such an extensive system of railways ? Sir C.; It suited the money-rings, They bought land at 10s to £2 an acre, held it until the railways were made, and then sold it at £lO and £2O an acre, and the trouble with them is they do not want to pay taxes for it.