THE Thames Advertiser. FRIDAY, SEPT. 11, 1874.

Thames Advertiser, Volume VII, Issue 1855, 11 September 1874, Page 2

THE Thames Advertiser. FRIDAY, SEPT. 11, 1874.

"We daresay that the decision of the electors yesterday, as to who should be the three men elected to fill tho vacancies in the Borough Council, will nob be greatly cavilled at. At the same time, we may say that we would have been quite as well pleased had the.three retiring members been re-elected. They have had but a short term of office, and we do not think that any great fault or neglect has been urged against them. The new candidates all sought to go in on the economy cry, of which far too much was attempted to be made. The fact of having voted a salary to the Mayor was also accounted a great crime, but we think that that might easily have been defended. The Mayor must necessarily give a large amount of time to the public service, and no man will do that here for the honour of the office, which Is not much. To insist that the work shall be done without pay, would be to limit the choice of men for the office to a very few, and the public could not expect to have the same claim on the

time of a man who is not paid as on the time and energies of a man who is paid. Dr. Kilgour's absence will be a loss to the Council, as lie was a regular afctender at the meetings, and was a good worker. *

Mr Gillies, in his annual addresses to his constituents, is always clear and distinct, and manages to make his orations have the appearance of a plain unvarnished tale. His speeches are made to look like simple history, devoid of partisanship or party feeling, while at the same time they are as damaging to opponents, and are no doubt meant to be so, as if they were filled with passionate invective. His effort of last Tuesday night was as successful as any before, although Mr Gillies's utterances were such as will not give any strength to that party in Auckland who are going to act on behalf of provincialism. Mr Gillies begins by giving a fair sketch of the state of parties at the opening of the Assembly. He states that the session only extended over fifty-six days, that there were 100 bills introduced, of which 86 were passed into law, and then he asks if these could have been fairly considered within so short a time. He then speaks of the Electoral Bill, which was so readily abandoned by the Government, of the South Sea scheme, and of the Forests Bill. He commends the caution shown by Mr Vogel in the financial statement, saying—" But this policy was only a copy of that pursued two years ago, by the members of the Opposition, and he was very glad to see Mr Vogel adopt it now." No doubt Mr Vogel has adopted many ideas from his opponents, but he adopts them at the right time, while those who oppose him are always out of joint with the popular notions. It is unfortunate for a politician to want to be cautious when success can only be won by boldness and dash. In respect to the famous resolutions repecting the North Island, Mr Gillies does unquestionably succeed in putting Mr Vogel in a corner as regards their introduction—showing that they were not thought,of at the opening of the session, nor at the time of the Financial Statement, nor .till Mr Vogel took mortal offence at Mr Fitzherberfc, the Superintendent of Wellington, and had counsel of Mr Thomas Russell. Here is Mr Gillies's account of the incidents which led up to the resolutions:

Between the second reading of the bill and the reply of Mr Vogel on the 4th of August, a gentleman of great ability, well known in the province—Mr Thomas Russell—arrived in Wellington, and from him he (Mr Gillies) received his first intimation of the proposal contemplated by the Government for the abolition of the Northern provinces, The fact was communicated to him (Mr Gillies) and to other members of the Assembly. Mr Vogel was then communicated with. Knowing the influence Mr Russell had with the Government, he could not help connecting the arrival of Mr Russell in Wellington with the fact that on the 4th August Mr Vogel announced for the first time his idea of doing away with the Northern Island provinces. On the 21st of July Mr Vogel had no idea of such a resolution. He was going to assist all the provinces; of course including Auckland, Wellington, and Nelson; in fact he was going to do so all round, and he has done so, it seems On the 4th of August he announced that unless they were true to him, the Superintendents and provincial institutions would be abolished.

Mr Gillies then " shows up " the proceedings and arguments of Mr Vogel, showing that he had been inconsistent and illogical:—

Mr Gillies avowed his desire to wipe out all the provinces in New Zealand, bat he should like to see it done in a statesmanlike manner, and he did not care who brought forward the measure for that purpose, whether it was Mr Vogel, Mr Reader Wood, or whoever it might be; they should be prepared to tell the country what they were going to put in the place of the provinces. He thought no Englishman in a free country like this was going to give up his local self-government, or call it whatever name they liked, without being allowed to have a voice in the matter, fle thought tlut those who had been brought up in a free country would proclaim their rights, and make the Government express its views a3 to what they proposed to substitute for the provincial system of government. Looking at the resolutions, did they find any idea at all expressed by Mr Vogel of what he intended to substitute for provincialism ?

All this, we are sure, will have very little effect upon those who are disposed to approve of Mr Vogel's proposal to abolish the provinces. Ihe colony has made up its mind that the provincial form of government is unsuitable for it, and the first step is to determine that it shall cease. If we wait till there is a cut and dried system, which everybody is pleased with, ready to be substituted, before we even say a word in condemnation of provin- , cialism, we shall have to endure it for a very loLg time. We venture to say, that so tired is the country of provincial government—which for years past has prevented anything like real local self-government, and has also prevented the peoplef rom exercisinga proper check or control over the General Government—that we shall not be difficult to please in a substitute. In countries governed like Britain and its dependencies the central government is supported, and, at the same time, kept in check, by the local bodies. The Provincial Governments of New Zealand, especially those of the North Island, have become incapable of exercising that function. They exist on charity, and have no health in them. They are governments and legislatures depending upon another government and legislature, and so are in an entirely false position. But before provincial governments are abolished, we will be able to see what we are to have as a substitute. Next session, Mr Vogel will bring down his scheme of local government, • and we shall be able calmly to estimate its worth before we are called on to part with that provincialism, so precious in the eyes of some. Mr Gillies was once an enthusiastic provincialist, so decided that when Dr. Pollen came out to contest the Superintendency with Mr Williamson, Mr Gillies, who supported the former, frequently declared that in political views on the subject of provincialism, he was more in accord with Mr Williamson than with Dr. Pollen, who was an avowed Centralist, But teaure of

office as a Superintendent changed all fe that, and his opiuions now are these:— •™" He (Mr Gillies) wished it to be distinctly understood that lie was thoroughly of opinion tbat the abolition of Provincial Government in New Zealand should take place as soon as possible. Bub let them not mistake him. It was not on the ground of inherent vioiousness of the system of Provincial Governments, nor in the administration of them, but on this ground, tbat he had seen that the continuation of the Provincial Government system interfered with the development of true colonial ideas. At,first it did appear so in matters affecting the colony, but he had a great objection still, and his principal reason was that these Provincial Governments were held up simply as the buffers between the Colonial Government and the people, and that the Provincial Governments were' made a scapegoat to bear the sins of the Colonial Government. If they would only wipe provincialism away, they would then be able to get the Colooial Government face to face with the people. They would have then what is much desired—an opportunity of Bhow. ing what was the public opinion in regard to the Colonial Government.- .But now there are no means of doing so, Auckland being thrown down to the Provincial Governments, He wanted to seethe Colonial Government approached by the public in a direct manner, so their acts might be commented upon by the mass of the people—so that the people might have a voice ia. all matters touching their liberties, This sweeping; away of the Northern provinces, while the South remain as " it was, was unjust to this island. —We are quite sure that, holding these opinions, Mr Gillies would have voted for the resolutions, but for his antagonism to Mr Vogel. Mr Gillies is anxious that provincialism should go, if all the provinces go together. But : ' in politics, we must take what we can get, and must in almost every case, be content with something less than the absolute best. And Mr Gillies, and, every man in the Assembly, know that the vote of last session, although directed to the North Island only,' means the destruction of provincialism' throughout the colony, and so thoroughly has this been taken for granted, and acquiesced in even in Otago and- Canterbury, that the chances are that Mr Yogel will next session propose to make a clean sweep. Like Mr Gillies, we shall be gratified if that is done, to a far greater extent than if the abolition is only partial, but we differ from him in this, that we are content to proceed on the right path step by step slowly, if we cannot ■ get at our object by a jump.