THE Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR O'CLOCK P.M. Resurrexi. TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 1875.

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2005, 8 June 1875, Page 2

THE Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR O'CLOCK P.M. Resurrexi. TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 1875.

The Thames representative! in the Provincial Council have explained their action during the late session, apparently to the f atisfaction of the constituency. A vote of thanks was passed to the. speakers without any dissension, no statement having been challenged-—no questions asked. Whatever want of unanimity was manifested during the progress of the business of the Council, there was little show of it on Saturday. Even on the question of the Goldfields Secretaryship, out of which it was expected some differences would arise, there were no great discrepancies in the explanations afforded by Councillors.

The speakers all admitted that-there were grounds for what had been stated in these columns, viz., that tliere was a want of united action on their part, but they did not afford any information as to the cause or causes which had conduced-to bring about this result. Fortunately for the members themselves, as well as the district, it does not appear that our interests have suffered by the independent, single-handed course which the former pursued. Had it been otherwise we are pretty suro the meeting would not have passed a unanimous vote of thanks, but''it is possible some censure would have fallen to the lot of the representatives, it being their undoubted duty to consult together and to act in concert when any matter affecting their district came before the Council.

It was charged agaiusfc Mr Bagnall that he jeopardised the Vote for the Pumping Association by his precipitancy in tabling the abolition resolution. Wo are not prepared to admit this, or the further statement that if the abolition resolution had not been rescinded the Pumping Association grant -would not hare been authorised. We believe that the so much dreaded country members were actuated by a feeling of justice, and would not have perilled the continuance of a great work by refusing to vote money placed at their control for a specific purpose, which they knew could not be diverted from the purpose. It would :hav« betrayed aMog-in-theVmanger disposition to; have negatived the proposal for i the Pumping Association vote, and we do not think a majority of the Council ;could have been got to do it; so that whatever error: Mr Bagnall committed— wo do not say he did err—in introducing •his motion on the.question..of abolishing the Provinces, we do not apprehend that ithe Pumping Association would have ibeen affected by it even had the result of the debate on Mr Sheehan's counter resolutions been different to what it was. It was not Mr, Bagnall's, fault that the; Councilalidwed itself to "be made ridiculous by passiDg his resolution without debate; if the party opposed to it had managed their lobbying better, the resolution might have,met with a different fate; and the; Council Tfould have been 1; .spared the humiliation of rescinding a ; resolution on such an important question [immediately after it had been adopted. 5

On a subsequent occasion Mr Bagnail's conduct was much more open to question, and we confess that at the time the conviction forced itself upon us' that he had tried to talte advantage of his , colleague's absence to gain kudos for himself by rushing through the House a ■motion for the granting of the money to the Pumping Association, knowing well ,thafc r.the , people,- >of . the, Thames were ; keenly interested and fully aware of what 'Mr Carpenter had doneifiCr Btgnatt 'has explained, however. ~t Blii^^jjfe, of motiTes. Mr llastnall has given hia reasons for the course he adopted; and as no cause was shown' to the contrary we must accept the explanation in good faith. "We had very good grounds, however, for the opinion we expressed at the time, that Mr Bagnall's motion was intended to take, the wind out of, Mr Carpenter's sails; and we happen to know that that ©pinion was shared by persons who had opportunities of discovering the feeling in and about the Council Chamber. Mr Carpenter may be pardoned for the length of his address. He had been "T!frarged-wvlh_desertiDg his colors, and, further, with doing"thisTfor an unworthy motive. It was therefore excusable that he should take up more time than his colleagues in explaining his position, which explanation, however, must be taken with certain reservations. We should have been sorry to say Mr Carpenter voted against the abolition of Provincialism because he - wanted the Gddfields Secretaryship, although this has been laid to his charge ; but we do think Mr Carpenter displayed some inconsistency in voting as he did, and much more inconsistency in his. reasons for doing so. During his candidature for the Council Mr Carpenter declared himself in favor of abolishing Provincial institutions, and what we knew .of his political opinions generally was all favorable to this view; and it is not satisfactory to be told now by Mr Carpenter that although he did say Provincial Governments should be abolished,'he did not say wheifor how ; and that he must be satisfied there was something better to., take their placets fore he voted for their, abolition. At the time Mr Carpenter was elected people were looking forward to some indefinite time when Provincialism would be done away, with,' and he concurred in .the general opinion. Since that time the proposal for their abolition has assumed a definite shape, and Mr Carpenter's constituents have declared themselves in favor of the proposal. . It is rather disingenuous therefore for Mr Carpenttr'to attempt to set himself right by pleading that he contended for any reservation whatever when he wooed the electors with promises / that he approved of the abolition of Pro- . vincialism. It was merely,an expression of opinion that was asked of the Council, ' and Mr Carpenter has assisted (by voting as he did) the attempt to convey an impression that the .Province of Auckland is opposed to the abolition.of Provincialism. In this he erred, and' laid himself open to attacks by parties who are ever ready to impute improper motives to those who differ from them in opinion. There are other points, in the representatives' addresses to which we may allude in another issue.