THE Thames Guardian AND MINING RECORD. MONDAY, DECEMBER 18, 1871.

Thames Guardian and Mining Record, Volume I, Issue 62, 18 December 1871, Page 2

THE Thames Guardian AND MINING RECORD. MONDAY, DECEMBER 18, 1871.

<s . What is there in Auckland tliat the Thames should he permanently united I to it, and that: the interests of the I Thames should he subordinated to the : interests ol Auckland ? We should be ! glad il any ot our contemporaries would - enlighten ns. on this point. If we could j he persuaded that the existing state of things is the result of natural causation, we would accept the inevitable, and bear our fortunes bravely. But we have misgivings on the point; and as it is a case of conscientious scruples, we should be grateful for any light, however, flickering, that might help to resolve our doubts. Surely there must be some, amongst the numerous political doctors ot Auckland, that can satisfy us on this delicate point. We look to them for advice and instruction; wc hope we shall not look in vain. W c are led to put this case of conscience in this way, because we have been puzzled to account for a variety of things which are happening daily, and which have had an enduring existence since the opening of the goldfield. We have tried, for instance, to draw, some parallel, between the community of Auckland, and the community at the Thames; 'but wc failed to discover any points of resemblance, even the faintest. Wc then asked ourselves the question, why it was that two communities, so different from cadi other, in their constitution, aims, and operations, should be nun aturallv and permanently yoked together. And here v,e encountered our greatest difficulty. \Y e could not conceive if, possible that, the Thames should desire a continuance of the political bond of union, seeing that it is so large a loser by it; and wc could not understand how a community like Auckland, "which regard the miners as an unsettled class oU

men, of no country, and with' no home or home ties, and which has over and over again lamented the cost, to which the goldfield put them, directly for its government, and indirectly by reason ol loss on mining, and raising the price ot labour, should not gladly sue for a divorce. But the fact is otherwise. The partnership is continued, although both partners profess to be losers.. Auckland has made the largest profession of loss, however; the amount of private advances to the goldfield, by Auckland capitalists, according to the Aucklanu newspaners, bcingsomewhat man ollous. Reading some of those articles, id instance in the “ Herald,” we have wondered more than once, where all the money came from. How was it acquired ? By whom was it accumulated ? Who ever handled it ? Was it ever coined except in the mint of our contembrain ? TV lint might have boon the interest, at l<iper cent, on the real or imaginary advance, to goldfield enterprise ? \A <• dare say many of our readers have fallen into a similar train of thought sifter reading one of these financial flourishes. We never heard of large capitalists in Auckland until after tbe goldfield af: (he Thames had 1 icon opened: but when our mining population began to pom 1 turnr golden tribute into the lap of Auckland receivers, the multiplication of capitalists in Auckland became the only rule in arithmetic to which attention was given. For our own part we are not content with matters as they stand. TV e think they are eminently unsatisfactory. The Thames*is the loser every way; Auckland, on the other hand, gains at all points. To our mind, the cxHanmtions against the goldfield are a sham ; they are a device to divert attention from the loss and injury sustained by this community through political connection with Auckland. “ I do the “ -wrong, and first begin to brawl, was was the confession of Gloster. He thereby turned suspicion from himself ; and so it lias been, with Auckland. To distract attention from tbe wholesale absorption of tbe political, commercial, and financial interests and influence of the Thames, the cry has been set up again and again, that but for Auckland the Thames could not exist; that but for Auckland capital the Thames could not have been developed. Where was Auckland capital when Hunt and party discovered and endeavoured to raise money to work their claim? What did Auckland capital do in developing the Long Drive, Golden Crown, and a score of other claims, until after their richness had been demonstrated, and opportunities arose for making money by speculating in shares ? It any capital was invested in the early days of the field, it was advanced bv the struggling tradesmen and mechanics ot Auckland, and not by the so-called capitalists, who refused to believe in the field tor many weary months alter it was opened. We say, tbe Thames owes nothing to Auckland ; but Auckland owes everything to the Thames . ft owes its existence to the Thames. But for our gold export, and our trade and contributions to the revenue, Auckland would have been bankrupt publicly and privately. It possesses no resources on which it can depend. It produces nothing; and it lived for so long on the farming classes that it ruined them entirely. The usurious rates of interest charged on money, the system of selling produce on commission, and the other contrivances for relieving the farmer ot his money, succeeded so well, that there is not to-day in Auckland province ten farmers of one hundred acres each, cultivated as farms should he. Having killed the farming interest, and the military expenditure being at an end, the goldfield became tbe object of attack or attention. And right well has the work been done. TV e give the Aucklanders credit for ingenuity, enterprise, and enemy. They have monopolised all the credit, and most of the profit of our gold export; they have monopolised our trade, compelling us to pay double profits, and double freights and charges ; they have used us politically for their own purposes, and deny us even a measure of justice.

Surely the time has come for putting a stop to all tiiis. Prosperity under such circumstances is impossible. A Ye have neither influence in the counsels of the Colony, nor fair representation in the Provincial Legislature. TYe can have no possible chance of fair play from the Colonial Legislature so long as wo are content to remain attached to the skirt of Auckland. YYc must depend upon ourselves if we hope for deliverance. AA e must take the matter into our own hands, and make our voices heard in the colony. There is enough honour left in the General Assembly, we believe, as would do justice to the Thames, were its ease fairly stated. Our dependence, therefore, should be upon ourselves as a community, and on the Assembly. AVe are entitled to, and should demand, the administration of our own affairs. Wc are entitled to, and should demand, the exclusive use and control of our goldfield revenue, and the capitation grant from the Consolidated revenue. We should only be liable for the interest and sinking fund of so much of the Public AA orks and Immigration Loan as may be spent on the goldfield for public purposes, and not for the interest and sinking fund of the expenditure on the A) aikato and Kaipara Railways, which can in no possible way benefit im. Indeed, the W aikato Railway will divert the produce of the Upper Waikato from its natural outlci, the Port of llzuraki, ami thus injure the Thaiucs incalculably. A\ e arc ciditlcd to appear in the official ‘Tilde rHil" is ;:v (Ilf port of cxpbi'i oi ihc gold produced on the field, and not Auckland, and wc should insist ou the export duty being collected ai the Thames instead of at Auckland. Lastly, wc should insist on the province providing out of our current revenue, for the construction of suitable harbour

works, without which we cannot well hope to shake off the grip of Auckland, or to progress as the district should. We throw out these Hints to our readers, because we conceive that the time lias come for action. We rejoice to perceive that the local jealousies which heretofore weakened the influence of the goldfield communities have all but disappeared. What is wanted is unanimity, perseverance, and moderation. and with these in practice, the end which is the emancipation and development of the Thames Goldfield, will he attained. We shall return to this subject on another occasion.