POLITICAL ADDRESSES.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2125, 15 November 1890, Page 2

POLITICAL ADDRESSES.

MB TWOMEY AT TIMAEU. Mr J. M. Twomey addressed a large meeting in the Theatre Royal, Timaru, last Ihursday evening, His Worship the Mayor being in the chair.

INTKODT7CTOEY. Mr Twomey, who on rising was received with applause, expressed a hope that all candidates would receive a fair hearing. There were some things which were the inalienable rights of free citizens, and amongst these were liberty of speech and liberty of conscience. With regard to his recent retirement from the contest at the bye-election, the whole cry was " split votes," and some people circulated the story that he had dined with Mr Kerr on the previous Sunday evening, aiad that it was a made up thing between himself and Mr Kerr that he (Mr Twotney) should go in to split ! the voces so as to secure Mr Kerr's return. They all knew how false that was, and he now referred to it only to warn tbeai against lies. There were lies always set afloat at election times, in people seemed to revel m '

them There were lies afloat now, and he would ask them not to believe one word until they had undoubted proof of it. But, to return to his having retired, he found that Mr Hall-Jones' committee decided unanimously to take a show of hands at Mr HallJones' meeting to see who would retire. This was not done, and in addition to this Mr flail-Jones refused to answer a question put to him in writing, asking him would he retire if requested to do so. From these facts he concluded that there was not the slightest hope of getting Mr HallJones to retire, and consequently he (Mr Twomey) felt that it was necessary for someone to exercise a little common sense. Some people blamed him very much for having retired, but if the election had resulted otherwise than as it did what would these people have said ? Pimply, they would put it j down to his having split votes. He held he had done the proper thing, and in proof of it he could show lotters from the Liberal leaders congratulating him on the course he had taken. (Applause). The great objection to him was that he was not a local man. He lived on the borders of the constituency—the only bit of freehold property he possessed was in the Borough of Timaru ; he was closely connected with Timaru in business, and if be could make Timaru a Melbourne, or a London, it would be hundreds if not thousands of pounds in his pocket. But what could he do for Timaru ? They wanted no local works, he had no local interest except what they held in common with the colony as a whole, and the man they ought to elect was the man that would work for the whole colony. Would it be better for them, to have a man that would assist to cut up large estates, or a man that would vote against it ? With regard to his previous career he won hands down in his own side of the district last election, and was defeated by the plural voters of Dunedin and Christchurch, and Mackenzie Country squatters. It was fashionable to decry candidates suspected of having a leaning towards the working men- They were called public agitators, they were accused of truckling to working men. and so on, but in his opinion this was absurd in a country where the law made all men equal, Por his part he did not care about this. He was there as a candidate and it was his business to get as many votes as ha could, and he did not care where these votes came from. The law had made all men equal, and he certainly was not going to draw any class distinctions. He would lay his views fairly and honestly before them, and if the people desired to divide themselves into classes they could do so and vote as it suited them. They nad been fold that all were Liberals in this colony, and consequently he felr it his duty to show they were no*. PABTY.

He laid great stress oh the necessity of electing a thorough party man, and to justify his doing so he would giye a brief sketch of Parliamentary history, which commenced with the introduction of the Public Works Policy in 1870, Many now denounced that policy, but if the original intentions were carried out, it would have proved a great blessing. The original proposal was to borrow at the rate of £1,000,000 a year, to introduce immigrants and settle them on the land, and to make the land pay the greater part of the interest. Provisions were put in the bill to make land in the vicinity of railways pay the interest, but the landed interests in Parliament threw this out, they forced expenditure at the rate of £2,000,000 a year, and, according to Mr Gillies' speech in Hansard, agents were seDt out to buy land along the proposed lines before the Bill had passed through Parliament. These were the men who ruined the Public Works scheme, and ruined the colony also, and now they were the loudest in their denunciation of any effort put forth to retrieve the lost position of the colony. The voice ot Tiroaru was then raised against this, and there was no voice in Parliament could sing more sweetly. Sir Edward Stafford said " I firmly believe that if we are I going to land a large number of people upon the shores of this country without offering them facilities for settling in the interior, away from the seaports, we shall have nothing but a hungry, discontented, semi-pauperised peripatetic, unsettled population." The words of Sir Edward Stafford were prephetic. Still that abominable institution; " the swag " was as flourishing as ever. It was a disgrace to their civilisation, and they should all combine to put the people on the land and so do away with it. (Applause.) THE CONTINUOUS MINIBTBY.

The same party remained so long in office that they were called the Continuous Ministry. 'lhey objected to be called this, however, because the personnel had changed. This did not mend matters. The policy remained the same, and it was to the continuous policy they objected that policy which, like the Upas tree, was spreading woe and misery over the face of the land, and keeping the colony sunk deep in perpetual depression. In 1879 they came in on a retrenchment scream, took 10 per cent, off the civil servants, and just as recently drove a large number of people out of the colony. Mr John Holmes, speaking in Parliament, said " that in 1882 tht-v had a surplus of £203,000. They increased the expenditure in one year by £400,000, next year by £47,000, and went out in 1884 with a deficiency ■

of £140,000." If this is correct they increased the expenditure in two years enormously, which was not bad for a retrenchment Government. Mr Postlethwaite called them a lot of Yankee log-rollers; Capiain Sutter, at Pleasant Poiat, said the Ministry was weak and resorced to log-rolling; Mr Sutton said to his constituents, "I sold my vote, and there is the price of it," pointing to some local work; and Mr Wakefield said they bought the Inangahua seat to keep him out of Parliament. That was the character they got from their own followers in 1884,

THE PRESENT MINISTBT. Just as in 1879, the present Ministry came in on the retrenchment scream, aad drove between 10,000 and 20,000 people out of the colony. Their retrenchment consisted chiefly of shifting taxation from the public revenue to the revenue of local bodies, and by similar financial jugglery. They talked of abolishing the Native Department, but instead of doing so appointed seven new judges and Mr Edwards, who gets £ISOO a year and £IOOO travelling expenses. They dismissed public servants in 1888, and appointed 113 fresh ones in 1889. Their estimates were so excessive that the House cut them down by nearly £50,000. As an instance Mr Pish said they addec 1 as a bonus £l5O to the salary of £6OO which Mr Sperrey was getting, and £IOO to the salary ot £750 which the Surveyor General was getting, and thus almost all those whose salaries were over £2OO got something, but not a penny was given to those whose salaries were under it. And now Sir Harry Atkinson t wants the world to admire his financial genius, but how did the finances get into a muddle? In 1885 Sir Julius Vogel proposed to increase the customs duties, so as to produce revenue, but the Atkinsonians would not let him. The consequence was that he had a deficit of £146,000, and instead of arresting the growth of this deficit Sir Harry Atkinson delayed dealing with it until 1888, when it had accumulated to the sum of £528,000. Had Sir Julius Vogel's proposals in 1885 been allowed to be carried out there never would have been a deficit, and had Bir Harry Atkinson grappled with the position when he took office, instead of allowing it to accumulate to such an enormous i sum, he could have carried on with far less taxation than be does now. But he did not; he allowed it to grow, and then increased taxation by i £330,000. All Sir Julius Vogel was [ short was £146,000, and Sir Harry j Atkinson says he reduced expenditure by £230,000; then where was the need , of the increased taxation of £330,000 ? The fact is, there must have been very little retrenchment, or else we would have an enormous surplus now. Sir Harry Atkinson asks us to admire this muddling. If the present Ministry object to the title Continuous Ministry they cannot very well object to be called the

BLUNDERING MINISTBY. ' They appear to poaseßß an extraordinary faculty for blundering, in fact such as would put Handy Andy* ' to the blush. first they made a 1 muddle of the £2,000,000 Loan act, ; and this is estimated to have coßfc the colony £IOO,OOO. One of them was kicked out of office for malpractices, and he says the Premier was guilty of exactly the same practices, and the Premier has not contradicted him. Another was forced to resign, and get himself whitewashed by his constituents from the charge of corrupting the fountains «f justice and intimidating a judge of the district court. Another allowed an immense tract of land to pass into the hands of the 1 Honorable Koberfc Campbell, because, he said, he sent the wrong telegram. He also passed another large estate into the bands of the son of the Agent-General, although the neighbors, led by Mr McKenzie, IvI.H.R, and the Land Board, were clamoring to have it cut up for settlement. An architect named Daniel Mahoney sued the Minister of Public Works for services rendered. Mr Fergus swore in court the money was not due, but the jury did not believe him, and gave judgment for Mahaney. Then, lifce a drunkard who pleads the Tippling Act, Mr Fergus pleaded a technical"' point, and defeated the ends of justice. Mr Mahoney petitioned Parliament, and got the money. That was one of the meanest transactions on record. Then there was the Te Kooti muddle, the arrest of the Maori the other day, the appointment of Judge Edwards, and capping, them all; the Bank of New Zealand scandal, which, in his opinion, made up a record astounding in its enormiiy of suspiciousness. Could they ask was he opposed to such a Ministry ? How could an honest man defend them ? Can an honest man vote for them ? The question is, Are they guilty as regards THE BANK OF NEW ZEALAND.

We know they fought desperately to pack the committee to inquire into it. We know that they got five of their own followers against four of the Opposition on that committee, and we know that the committee had to resign because they were not allowed to go into the matter. The resolution appointing the committee read, " That a select committee be appointed to ascertain whether all, or any, of the accusations made agaimft the Government, and especially against certain members thereof, made by Mr Hutchison, are true or false.'' 0w this was the resolution moved fay Mr Hutchison himself, and mark . th&

words, "especially against certain members thereof," that is, certain members of the Government. Thus the chief eharge is the charge that certain members were indebted to the Bank of New Zealand, yet the Government would not allow the committee to inquire into this, and in consequence the committee refused to go on. The whole thing was very buspicious, and to ordinary minds it would appear that where there was so much smoke there must be some fire. Had they assisted the bank openly many woold sympathise with them, but to do it stealthily indicates that they would do other things stealthily, and that they are not to be trusted.

THE LUEEAL PARTT held power for a brief period in 1877, under the leadership of Sir George Grey. In that brief period they imposed a land tax, introduced triennial parliaments, extension of the franchise, village settlements, and perpetual leasing. They were not able to carry them. Sir John Hall getting alarmed resigned his seat in the Upper House, put himself at the head of the Tories, and, as the late Mr John Sheehan told him, boiled these measures in Sir George Grey's billy. They passed the Liberal measures, and they had been boasting of it since, but let it not be forgotten that it was , the Grand Old Man of New Zealand heading the Liberal party who mtro-l duced them. Sir Kobert Stout came in in 1884, and the cry was " Keep the Ministry in and their measures out." He had no real majority, and was kept in office to keep Sir Harry Atkinson out, yet despite -this he passed the most liberal Land Act the world has ever seen. Under this dummvism was unknown, under it) large estates were not growing larger, under it the unemployed were being settled in village settlements, where most of them are still contented and prosperous, despite all the present Government could do to destroy them. They also made several attempts to shift the burden of taxation from the people to the shoulders of wealth, and try to get large estatesopened for settlement under the Land Acquisition Bill. But they never had a majority, they never had a chance of doing what they wished t© do, and it was his dearest wish and his fondest hope to see them at least once in power with a strong following at their back. Here they had a beautiful country, rich in mineral wealth, fruitful in soil, delightful as regarded climate, in fact, one of the brightest spots beneath the canopy of Heavea. Its resources were great, it could produce all that was necessary for the comfort and convenience of civilised life, itcould (support 20,000,000 in peace and prosperity, vetherethey were, half a million of people, with thousands annually fleeing from their shores, while those of us who remain behind are plunged in the miseries of a fratricidal warfare that is spreading woe and misery over the length and breadth of the land. Ib it the fault of the soil that this is so? No. Is it the fault of the people? JSo. It is tta fault of the muddling legislation which connived at creating monopolies, and reduces the irany into mere machines for producing wealth. This was at the bottom of the depression. 1 his was why he was a party man, and this was why he asked them that night, Was it not time to m&keachange? Hetherefore wasa moßt determined opponent of the preseal Ministry, or any reconstruction of the same party, and the reason ha had dwelt at sueh length on this was that he considered it the most important, Question of the day, to effect a change of Ministry, and a change of policy.

PRESENT PROPOSALS. And what ware the proposals contained in the Premier's manifesto? Simply that there is to be no more retrenchment, that the Property Tax must not be touched, and that there must be further borrowing. Hitherto the cry had been that a Land Tax would drive capital away, as if landowners could take their land on their shoulders and clear out to sea with it. Between 1886 and 1888 1500 persons who were paying Property Tax left the colony, and the value of property fell by 5i millions. Did not that show that the Property; Tax was driving capital away?* Now the cry was j changed. A Land Tax would fall heavily on country Bottlers. The Atkinsonians were not always so very careful of the interests of country settlers. In 1885 the Stout-Vogel Ministry brought in a bill to exempt

from taxation £3OOO worth of the improvements made by farmers and £3OOO worth of machinery industrially employed. What did the Atkinsonians do ? They flung their proposals in the face of the Stout-Yogel Government and cried " Keep the Ministry in and their meosures out." In 18S7 the Stout-Vogel Government proposed to exempt from increased taxation £2500 ■worth of property. What did the Atkinsonians do? Increased the tax to one penny. Now they were screaming about theinterests of settlers, and what was more remarkable the settlers generally believe them. A dog, o horse, animals ■with backbone and animals without it, know the person that was kind to them, but many voters in this colony do not seem to do so. The Stout-1 "Voeel Government did their best to 1 relieve industry of taxation, yet those whom they wished to benefit voted aeainat them. He only wished to say that no Liberal, unless a born idiot, would hurt a farmer. The greatest desire of Liberals was to develop the. resource's of the cotony, and as farming was the dost important industry

every onejwith a grain of sense in his head would do hia best to assist it. TAXATION.

The great question was, would a Land and Income Tax produce sufficient revenue. The Premier held that it would not, but his reasoning was defective. All his calculations were based on a penny in the £, bat why limit it to a penny. The unimproved taxable land in this colony was over 75 millions, and the value of improvements over 35 millions. Supposing you deducted the value of improvements and put a tax of three-half-psnce on the unimproved value of land the result would be that you would get more revenue, and that you would relieve improvements of taxation, and that you would increase taxation on those who had not improved their land. That would certainly settle disputes as regards real property, but there was another matter to be considered, There was at present 85 million pounds worth of personal property paying taxatior, and something would require to be put in its place. The question therefore i*, would an Income Tax produce revenue equal to the sum which personal property yielded at present? That he could not say. There was no data to go upon. There was nothing to show the income of the colony, but if there was a deficiency there were ether means of making it up. There were, for instance, land and other companies escaping taxation now, For instance, supposing the Levels Estate belonged to a private individual, and he died, bis executors would have to pay, perhaps, £50,000 in succession duties. Now companies 'never died, and consequently a tax equal to succession duty ought to be put upon them. Then there was over 8 millions of the property of absentees in the [colony, and that should be specially taxed, and there was 6£ millions of money on fixed deposit in the banks which at present escaped taxation. He was theretore of opinion that there was no unsurmountable difficulty in the way of a Land and Income Tax, and that it could be adjusted with great advantage to the settler who has improved his land. But was the game worth the candle ? To make the change would be very expensive, and it appeared to him better results would be obtained another way. Suppose, for instance, you had a graduated Property Tax', beginning, say, at £SOO with a half-penny in the £, increasing it by farthings in every £3OOO or £4OOO until you reached a maximum, would not that be better ? He thought it would, because he was in favour of , .progressive taxation. On a previous occasion he showed them how the Customs Duties were a progressive tax on the poor, and that being so no ' ene could logically object to direct taxation being made progressive, i Political economists held that each man shall contribute to the revenue i in proportion to his means, on the principle of the equality of sacrifice. 1 According to that the man who had i £IOO,OOO should contribute 100,000 j pence to the one penny the man who had only one pound contributed. Now i did they do that through the customs? Did the man with the £IOO,OOO drink 100,000 times as much tea, etc., as the man of the £l. He did not, and he could not do it, even if he were Brigham SToung with all his wives and families. The Customs Duties were therefore a progressive tax on the poor, and for this reason he was in favour I of making direct taxation progressive on the rich. He did not care what they called it, property tax or land tax, it ought to be progressive, but if the Property Tax was retained he would insist on fair valuation. There were 9j millions of acres owned by 121 persons and 33 companies ; that is, 154 persons owned more than half the freehold property of the colony. These escaped with an average tax of about 2d per acre, which was simply disgraceful. If the Property Tax were to be retained therefore, he would insist on the list of values being exposed in a public place for inspection, eo that the people could see who was defrauding the revenue and who was not. ITTRTHER BORROWING. The next idea in the Premier's manifesto was further Borrowing, but he proposed to borrow in the colony instead of the London market. To carry out that idea it appeared necessary to abolish the Property Tax. A o-entleman in Timaru bought, some years ago, £3OOO worth of Government loan debentures, and he now pays Property Tax on that £3OOO, while the loan holders of London escape taxation. "Was this fair? Was this the way to encourage local enterprise ? The object of the further borrowing of the Premier was to make roada and bridges to open up the back- j woods of the North Isand. Now we have spent between 40 and 50 millions of money in epening up the country already, and on this money we are all paying interest. With this maney, on which we are paying such heavy taxation we have opened far more land [ than " t is necessary for our population, but the greater part of it is mono- ! polised by a few who use it as sheep ' walks. Let us utilise this land first, ' and by and by when the population gets 1 larger, and we want elbow room, we can go back into the backwoods and > fell the foreßts. This brought him to

I.A.BGE ESTATESThere were seven companies who owned nearly If million acres, and 146 others who owned about 8 millions of acres. The country was looking with dismay on these monopolies, and realising that bo long as they

existed prosperity was impossible. Some suggested they should be burst up with taxation, and others that they should be bought out. The Timaru Herald told them recently that «• bursting up " was plunder, but history was a record of plunder, confiscation and spoliation. The signs of the times indicated now that they were approaching a social millenium, and consequently he would like t© see as much honesty practised aa possible. All men would be honest if it paid them, and it appeared to him that it would pay the people to deal honestly with the owners of large estates. Let the Government compel large estate owners to lease their land for 21 years at a rental of five per cent, on the Property-tax value of them. Let there be safeguards provided that will ensure the landowners their rents and protect the tenants from landlord aggression, and give them compensation for improvements. The advan- j tages of this scheme were—lst: No i borrowing is necessary, and no State risk is incarred; 2nd: No one can call it Socialism or confiscation ; 3rd : The landowners are treated fairly; 4th : The tenanants will be better off than if they bought the land; and, sth •■ Poor men can take it up under the proposed lease who could not touch it' if they had to buy it. They had been told that there was a candidate going about who had fads. This was the only new idea he had suggested, and this was probably what was_ referred to. He was a funny politician who called this a fad, when it was reduced to practice in every country in the civilised world, the only difference being that while people in other countries carried it out voluntarily it was necessary to bring compulsion on the landowners of New Zealand. No man ever suggested a milder or less confiscatory, or a more effective way of dealing with the large estates, and it could be called a fad.

laborers' homes. In his maiden speech at Pleasant Point he suggested that the Government should buy from the present owners small plots of land of about 5 or 6 acres each, and lease them for life to agricultural laborers. The Stout-Vogel Government adopted this scheme, and brought a measure before Parliament to give it effect, but the Atkinsonians threw it out. In 1888 pressure was brought to bear on the Atkinson Government by the the Canterbury members, with Major Steward at their head, and £IO,OOO was placed on the estimates to give effect ts it. This was lost by one vote. The Tory Government of England passed a similar measure in 1887, called " Allotments Act, 1887." They would remember it as the Three-Acres-aad-a-Cow policy. He knew persons who sneered at this, and at the same time screamed "I am a Liberal," while they, in reality, were more Tory than the Atkinson Ministry, Lord Salisbury, and Mr Balfour, rolled up inty one. This scheme was likely to be taken up now, and in that case he claimed that he deserved well of the working men for having been the first to suggest it.

THE STRIKE. —LESSON 1

He was glad to learn thats the strike had taught Sir Harry Atkinson two , lessons, but he stiongly suspected that the Hon. GL McLean was his schoolmaster. The first lesson Sir Harry said he had learned was the unwisdom of affiliation of our unions with Australian unions. If it was wicked for the unions to affiliate with kindred institutions in Australia, why did not Sir Harry Atkinson also condemn the Union Company for having affiliated with the Shipping Association of Australasia. Was there to be one sauce for the goose and another for the gander ? But what did this show ? It showed pretty plainly that it was the intention of the Tories if they got into power again to pass a law to prevent affiliation, and thus curtail the natural liberties of the people. He warned them they would do more than that, too, but he would lay himself open to the charge of pandering to prejudices if he spoke what he thought. He would not go into the strike question, but thought the Union S.B. Company more to blame than the unions. He admired the TJ.S.S. Company; it was a splendid service, and though a great monopoly it did not abuse its position very seriously. But it was chiefly responsible for the strike, and the employers of labor made a mistake in backing the company up. The ememployers were mostly all unionists themselves, and were doing a quiet little bit of boycotting on their own account too. In Dunedin and Christchurch merchants boycotted grocera for selling sugar under regulation prices, and Millers' Associations boycotted bakers who undersold the staff of life. He hated boycotting, but he strongly sympathised with any efforts merchants", millers, and others put forth to place trade on a healthy root- , ing. What ruined trade was persons I who began with little or no capital, undersold their neighbors to secure customers, and paid their creators 2s 6d in the £. This ruined trade, paralysed the honest trader, defrauded merchants, brought down wages, and did nobody good. He strongly sympathised with those who tried to prevent this, but in order to make their own position logical they ought to have taken the working man by the hand, and compelled the "Onion rs,S, Company to and the strike. Un \ fortunately they did net do this, they I backed up the Union Company, and

to show their gratitude the Union Company increased freight by 50 per cent., although working their Teasels with the " flower of New Zealand's seaman." It was a pity the strike occurred, but now that it was over hi* advice was to forget it as soon as possible. They all made mistakes, it was only natural, for man was prone to err. Let forget it, and go to work cheerfully together once more- ''here were no reasons why they should entertain malice in their hearts for each other. The men had a perfect right to strike if they liked, and the employers had a right also to get other men in their place. There was no question of right or wrong in the whole affair, it waa simply a matter of discretion. Was it discreet on the part of the men to strike, and was it discreet on the part of the employers to the take action they did. This was all that was in it and consequently neither of them ought to retain spite for the other. The men behaved magnificently compared with strikers in other countries ; they ought to be proud of the respect for law and order which the men showed, and consequently they were deserving of every possible consideration. He would advise them all therefore to forget the past, and go to work amicably. There wereindications thatbefore long the old Countries would be involved in serious troubles, and if they kept out of it and worked harmoniously together, they would not only be able t© supply the ©ld countries with food, but the frightened capitalists would fly to their shores. .

MSSOK 2. The second lesson Sir Harry Atkinson learned was that Borne ready means to settle disputes was necessary, but that legislation could net provide it. Unionists would notice here, too,

that they had nothing to expect from Sir Harry. His is the brutal old doctrine of " keep the ring clear and let them fight it out," and was disgraceful. It wag the result of a misunderstanding of the relations between employers and employes and the State. The shipping companies, the merchants, and working men were tbe servants of the people, and the people paid them for the functions they performed. Were the people to stand by and see their coleny ruined by such quarrels P Supposing any of them employed a large number of servants and they began quarrelling amongst themselves and destroying property, would he not send for the police and have them up before the Court? That was exactly what the State must do. It must create proper tribunals, consisting of an equal number ©f representatives of capital and labor, who shall decide all labor disputes and end for ever quarrels which cause privations and hunger on the one side, and loss, waste, and often bankruptcy on the other side.

THE BAILWAY MEN. There was one class drawn into the strike with whom he strongly sympathised, and these were the railway men. As they all knew the railways were handed over to the tender mercies of Messrs Maxwell and Co., and before many months in office they disorganised the postal arrangements by running trains at inconvenient hours, and demoralised the railway servants by trying to force down their throats an objectionable compulsory insurance scheme. In this way the railway servants were forced to unite, and when the strike came on they were called upon to fill the places of tbeir brother unionists. Something ought to be allowed for sentiment in such cases, lhey had pledged not to do such work, and they refused to break their pledges and were dismissed. Their crime consisted of lovalty to their pledges, and as loyalty was a virtue and not a crime he certainly would do bis best to get these men restored to their former positions. (Applause)

dttmmtium:. They had neard a great deal about dummyiam, but he could not deal with it that night. There was only one way of stopping it, abd that was to j sell no more land. If this bad been • done from the beginning they would not have had to pay taxation new, and though late now it was better late than never. Sir Harry Atkinson had said in his manifesto the majority of the people were still iu favor of the freehold system, but in the face of the fact that two-thirds of those who had taken up the land adopted the leasehold tenure he could not see how the Premier could say such a thing without a blush.

DODGERY. The Government had worked a dodge with regard to the elections by fixing it in the middle of tbe shearing season. It was a disgraceful thing to try to disfranchise men in that way, but he hoped the shearers would insist on being allowed to go to vote. It was sometimes said that if the Tories got powerful they would try to take the vote away from the working men who had not a freehold, so it was important they should all vote this election,

CONCLUSION. He had been through the district and put some SO or 60 new electors on the roll, but never asked one man for his vote, and he was not going to do it. He considered button-holing and a sort of mUd coercion, which was frequently adopted, a violation of the ballot and an interference with rtlectoro" liberty. It was most insulting fox- one elector to try to direct another. It was as much us to jay I"You don't know. 3& led by th«

nose by me." He would advise them to vote according to their con&cienee for the man who he thought would do the best for the colony as a whole, and if they voted against him (Mr Twomey) he would accept the verdict eheerfully. There was one single reason why he desired to be elected, and that was he would be ashamed of the Liberal leaders, because Timaru never returned a Conservative before. He hoped, if beaten, they would tell | the Liberal leaders it was not his fault, and that he did his share of the work as well as he could. But, if beaten, he was not going to retire for ever into private life. He would still continue to work in the Liberal ranks. He had not lost faith in the ultimate triumph of Liberalism, He saw young New Zealand growing up highly educated, high-spirited, and keenwitted, and free from the prejudices which unfortunately so frequently divided their fathers. His hope was in them. They had a splendid model in Mr W. P. Reeves, the bravest and most enthusiastic democrat in New Zealand, and he hoped they would fellow his example. To them he would say " Tou have a noble heritage destroyed by misgovernment. It is a beautiful land, and it is worth fighting for. Tou will be its rulers in the future and responsibilities will rest upon you. Begin at once and insist on the vast sheep walks being opened to you to live upon, insist on the burden of taxation being placed on the proper shoulders, insist on a continuance of liberal education, and when you grow old you will have a a country full of peace, plenty, and prosperity, which is the blessing I wish you from the bottom of my heart." (Applause).

QUESTIONS. The following were tha replies to the principal questions a*k"d oh matters not dealt with io tbe address : Yes, the oumber of men who ware foaod ready to take the places of the strikers showed that there was a large surplus of labor, aod the fact was brought out by the Sweatiug Commission and eeen io the exodus of so many thousands lately. The ©n'y remedy was settling the land properly. —He believed iu protecting industries against the cheap labor of other countries; protection was trades unionism agiinst outsiders. Ho believed he was the first candidate in New Zealand to deo'are for protection.—He would abolish Cuatoms duties on the necessaries of life, and pointed out that in Irgbly protective Victoria there is no tax on tea, while here it is 6cl a pound.—He did not believe in the Hare system, as a poor candidate would be handicapped by the expense of canvassing a large district. —He believed in tru volunteers and would be glad to help them.—The Skinflints were not a " party." They had been Parliamentary scavengers and had done good service.—A list haoded him of the employe's and their wages in his office was incorrect except in one case, tb.it of tbe fereman, and the total wis £4 43 a week out. He would show anyone a correct list or tell them if they demanded it. (No, no).-If the purpose of the Upper Housn was to check hasty legislation, then it should not be composed of foHßila but tbe cleverest of men, and should have no legislative but only revisory powers. However, it was no use talking about reforming if. "Threatened men live longest." It had been threatened with reform for year*.—He did not believe in stonewalling, neither did he believe in tbe cloture. —it would ba better to keep the railways io the hands of the people ; but he was not sure that it would not be better still to try a good manager from some other country. (Applause.)—lt was absolute y necessary to have high education for State purposes. He would take the high school and college endowments and use them for pro>idiog scholarships to educate the cleverest to become the officials, magistrates, judges, lawyers, etc., of the future.—-In reply to a series of questions put by the South Canterbury Educational Institute, Mr Tworaey said he (1) could make no suggestions for alterations in the syllabus ; (2) favored the introduction of techoic*] education into the schools; (3) would place no limit at all upon education ; (4) would support tbe Private Schools Bill, as the rest of the candidates also undertook to do ; (6) would not raise the school age frnua 5 to 7, would not tamper with the Act at all except by the Private Schools Bi'l. The people new would never agree to cut down the public educa'ion. — He believed in local option, but the people were not ripe for it. They had all the power the local ©ptionist asked for now, but did not wish to use it. He would not give compensation to publicans, but tho?e who had built good houses should have soma notice ®f Joss of license, say ten years. He approved of school inspeo'ors being under a central department, and changed from plaoe to place. No more questions being asked Mr John Simpson moved a vote of thanks to Mr Twomey for his address. This was seconded in two places and declared carried. A vote of thanks to the chairman closed the meeting about 10.15.

MR RHODES'S MEETINGS. Mr A. E. G. Khode3 addressed a meeting of electors at Hilton on Wednesday evening. Mr R. Skinner occupied the chair. After epeakiog for about bd hour Mr Rhodes was asked a numbec of qnesUons chiefly as to theinorease of tax - tion through the oustomP. Mr Rhodes said that he should continue to oppose protective duties as he had done in the past nod ihat many of the duties put oa during the past few years, and which he had opposed, meant increased oost of living to the working olosaes. Mr Kelland at the close of the meeting moved that a hearty vote of thanks be passed to Mr Rhodes for his address and can* fidence in him as their raprsseßia'ive. This was seconded ky Mr Stevea. Mr also spoke very forcibly in l support of the motion, which was carried by acclamation. [ There wag a good attendance at Mr B/iodea'a meeting 8t Totara "Valley on T.iursday. Mr BUckler occupied the [ chair. Mr Rhodes was acorded a I miMDimous vo'e of thanks and confidence.