Wanganui Chronicle, AND PATEA-RANGITIKEI ADVERTISER. "NULLA DIES SINE LINEA." THURSDAY, JUNE 21, 1883.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XXV, Issue 10229, 21 June 1883, Page 2

Wanganui Chronicle, AND PATEA-RANGITIKEI ADVERTISER. "NULLA DIES SINE LINEA." THURSDAY, JUNE 21, 1883.

Those who expected a flat debate on | the motion for the address in reply have not been disappointed. Mr Shaw has a sufficiently pleasing dolivery, and, as for the matter of his speech, it would be unfair to judge him by his utterance on such an occasion. Taking everything into consideration he succeeded tolerably well, though the introduction of some comparisons between the value of the wool industry and the gold mining industry had better have been, omitted. The speech of Mr Lee, the seconder, occupied exactly five minutes, and all that can be said about it appears to be that it served the intended purpose, and was therefore to that extent a success. Mr Montgomery took the lead for the Opposition, but seerm to have done nothing whatever to ins part life and substance to the debate. He complained of the delay in calling the Houses together, though he must have known that an earlier meeting would have been practically impossible, as the alterations to the buildings authorised last session had only just been completed. Our correspondent informs us that the work was pushed on with the utmost rapidity, and that even now the building is not dry. All these facts were within Mr Montgomery's knowledge, and his objection, especially as coming from the ostensible leader of the Opposition, must be regarded as childish. On this occasion, at all events, there is no reason for believing that the Government desired a pretoxt for delay, and that they therefore allowed the contractors to proceed in a leisurely manner. The hostile reference to this matter by Mr Montgomery was particularly unfortunate as a starting point for the sessional tactics of the Opposition. His attack on last year's special votes for certain bridges was a thorough failure. He displayed in each case- the grossest ignorance of what ho was talking about. Amongst the items referred to was the £17,000 for the Wanganui Bridge. A very illtimed allusion was made to the defeat of Mr Ballance, and the election of Mr Watt in the Ministerial interests, but that was merely a peg on which to hang a charge against the Government. Mr Montgomery could not very well say that the £17,000 was in the nature of a bribe to Mr Watt, but he plainly said it was an improper concession made to Mr Watt for support rendered to the Government by that gentleman. Of course Mr Montgomery's dear friend Mr Ballance would never have stained his hands by sucji a transparent job, and would not have accepted the concession if he had been in. tho House and the £17,000 had been offered. Shamliberal innate purity would have effectually protected him against such a lapse from the paths of political virtue. This is the Mr Montgomery whom our local contemporary is continually holding up as a model of all that, is wise and statesmanlike. In Major Atkinson's reply he, amidst great laughter, taxed the leader of the Opposition with entire ignorance of the subject, and offered to sit down and allow him to say at once what he knew about the Wanganui Bridge, and the reason why the £17,000 was placed on the estimates. But neither then nor afterwards did Mr Montgomery accept the challenge. He merely sat still and tried to look wise. As Major Atkinson told him, he talked of what he called existing abuses, while in fact he did not attempt to look into the merits of any one of them. The Colonial Treasurer's speech was throughout confident, not to say aggressive, and as far as we can at present judge the Opposition have not the slightest chance of placing their men on the Government Benches during the course of the present session.