SEPARATION FROM NELSON.

Westport Times, Volume III, Issue 489, 10 April 1869, Page 2

SEPARATION FROM NELSON.

THE MEETING AT CHAELE«| We continue our report of the pr<H ceedings at the public meeting afi Charleston " for the purpose of ventiS| atiug the cause of Separation, anß of co-operating with Westport." ,-3b Mr Txleb, in supporting the reso9 lution which had been proposed by 3JM Dwan, said that already he had spokdH on the subject in another place, adH possibly many of them had read his ran marks, which had been reported sorasH what at length, and others would bffl acquainted with the nature of t«B proposition which had then beaß passed. He might say that at thaH meeting, where there was a large afli tendance, resolutions of a similaH character to that which had just beeM proposed had been carried with onaM one dissentient voice, and that wifl the voice of a hawking oysterman wbH had just come overland from NelsoiM and who, as such, was imbued witM Nelson ideas. —(Laughter). The« were several reasons which himself and others to take an intereH in the question for the discussion dH which the meeting had assembleM That which would be most intelligibly because most affecting the interests (fl everyone, was the appropriation cfl misappropriation of the revenue cj the district. He had been at BodH trouble to obtain statistics <fl the revenue and expenditure of thfl district, but it was not necessary tkaM he should now go into details. K Jm gave but the general results, he est™ mated that it would be sufficient tfl satisfy them that it was desiraWM

to separate from Nelson; and he reminded them that the figures he would quote were furnished by no secondhand authority, but by the Provincial Treasurer himself. He found that, by the Provincial Government, a larre proportion of their revenue had been retained, and how applied he would presently show. At all events there had been collected from the Southwest Goldfields, and not expended upon them, a sum equal to £59,000 or £60,000, and that only from the commencement of the goldfields to the end of December last. It became a question with them whether such a large sum should be retained by what he might call a foreign body, and applied to some other purpose than being expended on the district by which it was produced. He thought they must agree with him that such a state of things was by no means desirable —(Hear, hear.) He contend!ed that the proper persons to distribute those taxes were the persons from whom they were taken. It was altogether unjust and inequitable to take money out of his or their pockets, and to give it to others elsewhere. If there was any balance left after its legitimate purposes were served, it should be returned to them, and not given away to somebody at another place.—(Hear, hear.) Had the Provincial Government done so ? Most certainly not. They bad collected out of this part of the Province rather more than £172,000. As against that they had expended only £114,000, thereby leaving £58,000, which should have been expended in this district. How had that amount been expended P It might be in the Bank ; but it was not so. It was applied in that part of Nelson Province which was not included in the South-west Goldfielde, and in the promotion of such chimerical and quixotic schemes as a railway, a dry dock, and a hospital large enough to accommodate the patients of the whole Middle Island.—(Hear, hear.) Was that a satisfactory state of things, and were they inclined to submit to it?—("No," and "Certainly not.") That same money, had it been expended in a proper manner in fostering the enterprise and industry of the miner, might have been of infinitely greater value. This was one great reason why they should endeavor to secure a change. "Whether it should be secured by Separation or not was the question, but it must be ■admitted by all that a change was imjperative. Now what hope had they fof a change except by Separation ? He j could confidently say that, so far as (•concerned their connection with [Nelson, they utterly despaired of it.— [(Hear, hear.) Because latterly it had \ been getting worse and worse. Ever [since the present Superintendent had [been in office, the state of matters had | been getting worse. While Mr Saun- | ders was in office, there had been a |anore liberal policy. So large had ibeen the expenditure then that the [idea had arisen in the minds of the j community that the whole of the revenue had been expended. It was not [430, however. Still it must be admit-

|ted that there was a liberal policy. I "When Superintendent Curtis came jinto office, did the same policy obtain? jNo. So soon as Mr Curtis took office ; he enunciated his peculiar policy (MrTyler referred to the speech of the Superintendent to the Council,) and he adhered to it ever since. In the last Appropriation Act for the year ending March 1569, out of £150,000 appropriated, how much had there been appropriated for the "West Coast? £28,000 for departmental expenses, and £25,000 for public works—£s3,ooo out of £150,000; and all the remainder was appropriated for that part of the province not included in the Nelson South-West Goldfields. He had said that £25,000 had been voted for public works in the district. By the 31st of December, how much of that amount had been expended? £10,700 he believed ; whereas out of the £58,000 for the other portion of Nelson, no less a sum than £29,000 had been so expended. Bearing this in mind, he would ask them to look at the disparity in expenditure, and at the same time take into consideration the revenue derived from the different parts of the Province. Their Customs duties exceeded the Customs duties of Nelson. They had also the gold duty, with which Nelson had no fund to compare. They had also the South-west Goldfields revenue. He confidently asserted that the revenue of the Province of Nelson, independently of these goldfields, would not be £30,000, whereas the revenue of the whole Province was something like £130,000. Where did the balance come from but from the South-west Goldfields,? Yet out of the expenditure, Nelson appropriated £IOO,OOO to themselves, aal gave £50,000 to this district. To continue to maintain a form of government under which they were thus treated was altogether out of the question.—(Hear, hear.) Already he said that that they might despair of any redress of their grievances, because they had, comparatively speaking, no representation in the Provincial Council ; and this brought him to another reason for Separation. If representation were to be based on population, they should most certainly have an equal number of members. But what did they find ? That out of 26 members they had been most liberally awarded five! "What influence could that number possibly exercise? With a ■new, no doubt, of removing one of the salient arguments against Separation, the Government had of late promised a redistribution of seats. But they would be precisely in the same

position. It was no more possible for the five to exercise any influence amongst 19 than among 26. Under such a preponderating influence, the five must go to the waff, so long as their votes were not sought after. It would have been better to have raised the number to forty, if they liked. Among an increased number there might be born some political feeling; among forty there would certainly be some desire for office. As it was, instead of rectifying the matter, he believed it would be worse than before. . . .

. . . What advantage would there be derived from Separation ? One objection made was that what now obtained would also prevail if the district were governed from "Westport. But the petition which had been drawn up gave no more prominence to Westport than to any other place. Westport would have nn more influence than Charleston. To have more influence it must have a majority of members, and he could not conceive that, in the event of their being nine members, five of these were to be returned by Westport. How could it possibly obtain any advantage ? The same sort of argument had been used in Westland, but was there any truth in it ? The country or mining members had there combined against the town, and, having a majority, the result was that little or no money was to be expended in Grreymouth or Hokitika. What reason was there to believe that it would not be the same in this district? It was impossible that Westport could carry a majority of votes. For it to do so, it must have a number of members which the General Assembly would never think of granting. . . . . . . He had endeavored, and he trusted with some degree of clearness, to show that, with respect beth to revenue and representation, the existing state of things was not satisfactory, and that Reparation, the success of which was exemplified in the case of Westland, was their only remedy available. In such a district as this, the basis of all legislation must be the encouragement of the one great industry of mining, with which all other local industries and interests were so intimately associated.— (Applause.)