The Tuapeka Times. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 13,1870. "Measures, not Men."

Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 140, 13 October 1870, Page 4

The Tuapeka Times. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 13, 1870. "Measures, not Men."

"He has such wheedling ways." It must be so, for we find some of Mr. Macandrevv's old friends, but recently his bitterest enemies, showing signs of a returning like the dogs to their vomit. Like King Arthur in the presence of his faithless queen, they exclaim of their once faithful member, " Let no man say but that I love thee still." We find at the Clutha, men whose love for their old favourite had turned to hate, and who had nursed that hatred to such an extent as to teach their dogs to bark at the name of Macandrew, turning round by the magic spell of his piausable talk. However much we may have stigmatised Mr. Macandrew for his double dealing, we have always complemented him upon the homage he pays to the time-honoured custom of meeting his constituents every year to give an account of his stewardship. Still, we regret that we cannot look upon this good feature in his character, without a mingled feeling of distrust. When a man like Mr. Macandrew systematically deceives his constituents,

and misrepresents his acts, we almost feel inclined to believe that, were he not such a master of the clap-trap art, he would, like other members allow his works to speak for him, but Mr. Macandrew's doings, being of such a doubtful character, makes it absolutely necessary for him to square off every year face to face with his constituents, and by a. wonderful administration of the suaviter in modo, pacify them for another twelve months. There is only one thing we miss in the address of the honourable member for the Clutha, and that is the usual anathema he prouounces against the General Assembly. This omission we set down to the change which has come over his mind, and the corresponding change which is reflected in some of his late opponents. The, at one time, "man of the people " has now been a true and tried friend of the squatter for the last three years, and that section of the body politic will now, doubtless, '-'move the spheres" far his re-election to the Superintendency, in a more practical manner than he performed that amazing feat for the popular cause. The office of Superintendent is a comfortable one — it suits His Honour in many ways, and he suits the squatters, and why should he not be retained in the seat of honour for another four years, by which time he will be enabled to give his friends a still more secure tenure of the land, and bring a crowd of paupers, inta the country to work on the roads at four shillings a day, or less. There is only one thing in Mr. Macandrew's Clutha address to which we think it necessary to refer to show how he endeavours to gloss over his misdeeds and misrepresent his actions. While speaking of " The Otago. Hundreds Act JLB6S Amendment Act 1870 " he is reported to have said that he introduced the bill at the request of the Provincial Council, and although there had been considerable discussion over it, both when it was being considered by the Waste Lands Committee, and when before the House, it had been, passed almost without alteration. He saj^s nothing of the origin of the bill which he and his squatter friends introduced into the Assembly last year, against the expressed wish of his Executiyej^nd His Honour the Deputy-Supe?mt3!ti^-dent, which bill created the necessity for the amended one about which so much has been said and written. But, passing over that matter, let us for a moment examine the bill in its original form, as sent up from, the Provincial Council, and in its amended form as passed by the House of Representatives. Does. Mr, Macandrew consider that in the clause of the bill referring to the compensating of runholders, there is no difference between the expression a "legal fence," according to the Fencing Ordinance, and the substituted phrase, "any fence,'* which appears in the amended bill ? Does Mr. Macandrew consider that the substitution of a pre-emtive right of 720 acres for 640, is almost no alteration 2. Does he consider that the very important alteration in clause 12 of the amended bill, which gives runholders who did not take advantage of the 1866 Act, the opportunity of adding, even now, ten years to their lease — does he consider that, we ask, no alteration ? TheD again, the transfer fee is reduced from £10 to £1. In fact, every alteration made in the bill while in committee was a concession to the squatters, and for all these Mr. Macandrew voted.