POLITICAL NOTES.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2547, 26 August 1893, Page 2

POLITICAL NOTES.

As we anticipated, Mr Earnshaw has been guilty of something worse than his opposition to the Government on the liquor traffic question. He has in some way which has not yet been made perfectly plain attacked the Minister for Labor. He had to withdraw something ho said concerning Mr Reeves, and he has offended the Government in some other respects. We feel certain that the Government would never have treated him as he has been treated only that he exceeded the bounds of legitimate criticism. Mr Earnshaw is a very conceited, self-opinionated man, who has a tremendous idea of his own importance, and no doubt he has gone too far. This is borne out by the fact that Mr W. P. Reeves threatened to resign owing to some aspersions cast on him by Mr Earnshaw, and that ho would havo done so only that the Labor members met and passed a vote of confidence in him. Mr Earnshaw became still more violent when he found he had been excluded from this

meeting, but, if his action had been the cause of the meeting being held, we cannot say that ho had much to complain of. At first we sympathised with Mr Earnshaw, but, -with the new light thrown on his conduct, we must suspend judgment until we hear more about the matter. It is ominous that none of the Liberal party have stood up to defend Mr Earnshaw. We may have more to say on this point when fuller information reaches us

The Liquor Traffic Bill has gone through Committee like wild fire, and the Government have had it all their own way. On the crucial point Sir Robert Stout had only nine followers, and of these three belonged to the Opposition. The real Liberals who voted with Sir Robert Stout were Messrs Hall-Jones, Hogg, Hutchison (Dunedin), Meredith, Pinkerton, and Tanner, and Messrs Joyce and Earnshaw paired on the same side. Mr Rhodes and all the Conservative party, with the exception of Messrs Fisher, Harkness, and Newman, voted with the Governmet. So far the three-fifths majority has passed, and so has the provision that half the number on the roll must vote, or else the whole thing will be void. Twenty-five per cent, of the names on every roll are those of dead men and those who have left the district. It is shockingly scandalous to decide an question by the votes of dead men.

The following letter constitutes a striking commentary upon Mr Fisher’s violent abuse of a Wellington editor at Monday’s sitting:—“April 18, 1889. —Dear GiJlon, — I have thanked all my other friends who in any way helped me in the recent crisis. Let me now thank you cordially and warmly for your kindly advice and help tendered at a very difficult time. It is my wish that you should preserve this letter so that 1 may myself have the pleasure of looking at it at some future time as a reminder to me that I did my duty in gratefully acknowledging the kindly assistance of one who willingly and freely helped me in a time Of trial. Believe me to be, yours very faithfully, Geo. Fisher.” The date of the letter shows the “ time of trial ” referred to was the occasion of the writer’s expulsion from the Atkinson Ministry. Mr Gillon is the Editor whom Mr Fisher designated as the lowest, meanest, and most contemptible libeller it would be possible to find. Of this stuff some members of Parliament are made. Mr Fisher now shows his gratitude by a cowardly attack on Mr Gillon. Who can have any respect for Mr Fisher after this ?