POLITICAL NOTES.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2545, 22 August 1893, Page 2

POLITICAL NOTES.

The subject of establishing homes for habitual drunkards has been discussed in Parliament, and the idea has received considerable support. It would, we think, be a step in the right direction. It is admitted now by scientific men that the craving for strong drink is a disease—a sort of mania—and that while the poor, unfortunate person thus afflicted is suffering from it he has no control over himself, That being the case, he ought to be treated in a humane way instead of being sent to gaol. We have established hospitals, asylums, and so on, for other diseases, and we ought to treat the poor drunkard with equal lenity. He has, in fact, far greater claims, for he has already paid dearly for any attentions he may receive through the tax on what has made a drunkard of him. The State takes vast suras of money for duty on alcoholic drinks, license fees, and so on, and it. would be only fair to the poor wretch who has fallen a victim co the drink to have provisions made for him. We believe the day is not far distant when this will be done.

Mr Earnshaw, it will be remembered, attacked the Government for having thrown impediments in the way of Sir Robert Stout’s Bill. The Government have now retaliated by forbidding Mr Earnshaw to enter the Liberal Whip’s room, and by telling him that he is no longer regarded as a Government supporter. There must be some reason for this more than appears on the surface. .We cannot believe that the Government could possibly do such a mad thing as to boycot one of their own supporters because he happened to insist oh attention being given to a matter in which he felt an interest. If the Government has done this without some serious cause they deserve the condemnation of everyone, and if the Liberal party possesses one spark of manhood it will resent such an attempt to bludgeon members into obedience.

Sir Julius Vogel is petitioning Parliament to reconsider his claims. This is money alleged to be due to Sir Julius for services rendered in London in raising loans. When Sir Julius was AgentGeneral in Loudon he associated himself with some Land Company, and for doing so he had to resign. After resigning the Agent-Generalship he continued to act in the capacity of a loan agent, and did some work which entitled him to a commission. When his claim came in the Government repudiated it, and Sir Julius came to .New Zealand for the purpose of looking after his interests. Instead of doing so, however, Sir Julius went into Parliament, and became Colonial Treasurer; a ud let matters rest until he vacated ' position. There is an Act of at . .a ' ' '‘-H precludes the possibility Parliament win. . .* after a certain of suing the Governmeuo i „ on _ length of time has elapsed, anu v sequently Sir Julius found he could not enforce payment of the money. He has now petitioned Parliament to pass an Act to enable him to try the case in the Supreme Court. This we think is fair. If Sir Julius Vogel’s claim is fair and just he ought to be paid, and it would be right and proper to let the Supreme Court try the case.

The female franchiss clause of the Electoral Bill runs the risk of being thrown out in the Upper House again. It is to be hoped, if so, that the Government will not be blamed for it. Twice already the Lower House has passed the Bill by immense majorities, and twice the Council have blocked the way to women receiving the franchise. The Council has no constitutional right to continue obstructive opposition like this. The result will be if they do that fresh appointments will bo made, for the rejection of a measure like this three times in succession would justify it. One thing is very remarkable as regards the Council. Before the new appointments the old councillors were dying off rapidly, but not one of them has died since. The new blood evidently has had the effect of prolonging the lives of the old members.