MELBOURNE GOSSIP.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 2605, 23 March 1889, Page 2 (Supplement)

MELBOURNE GOSSIP.

(from odr own correspondent). The leading conservative organ has dc voted a whole page of its valuable Saturday's issue, to an account of the obstruction and stonewalling episodes which havo distinguished the past eeesion of tho now defunct parliament. Its object, of course, is apparent, being nothing worthier than knocking another nail into the political coffins of Messrs. Bent and Gauuson. From the article in question it is hard to say which of these two individuals is held up to more public odium. The number of times the members for Brighton and Emerald Hill addressed the House is represented by black lines of about equal length, which stretch out far beyond those of such quiet and useful members as, for instance, Mr M'Lean, Mr Gordon, Mr Graham, and Mr Wheeler. The Argue which never reports Mr Gaunson, unless the task be absolutely necessary, had to resort to the pages of Hansard for its statistics, and explains that the black lines denote only the number of times those irrepressible gentlemen spoke in Parliament, but not the length of their speeches, which we are given to understand is immeasurable. It is certain anyway that Messrs Bent and Gauuson are energetic and active Parliamentary representatives, and not the silent tools Of * political clique or party. To be complete the Argus should have published also a diagram contrasting the merit of the various speeches delivered, in which case I venture to think Mr Gaunson's line would still out-stretch the others not excepting even that of the verbose Chief Secretary. The article is all very well perhaps from a reader's point of view in that it revives some old personalities, discreditable enough no doubt, but for which, in the opinioa of many, one side is just as much to blame aa the other. Such things, one would thiuk, might better be left undistnrbed in the oblivion of the past. However, the Argus has chosen to rake them up again for the benefit of the community generally, and therefore public attention is once more drawn to them. For all the value the article possesses, it might just as well uever have been written seeing that it was compiled entirely on a wrong basis. The writer has fallen into the very egregious mistake of treating Messrs Bent and Gaunson Bβ ordinary members, like Mr Gordon and Mr Graham, who have no occasion to speak except now and again. The number of times that the Premier and Chief Secretary addressed the House is not referred to in any way, because the compiler correctly holds that their offices require them to be perpetually on their feet. And so it is with the leaders of the Opposition. Every time the Government make a proposition it calls for some reply on the part of the gentlemen on the other side, and the smaller the opposition the greater the number of times the leaders are required to speak. It was therefore distinctly unfair for tho Argus to contrast the frequency of Messrs Bent and Gaunson's speeches with those of two or three of the Government supporters, and put it down to obstruction pure and simple. This is where the article is at fault, and makes it absolutely valueless. Moreover the article from a logical point of view won't hold water for a moment.

The writer has overshot the mark, aud in zeal, and perhaps bitterness, has forged weapons that it would be eaay to use against himself. His whole page of matter and deduction proves at the very most that there were only two members in the last Parliament who could be charged with obstructing public business. At the same time the* Argus goes in powerfully for reform of parliamentary procedure as an important part of the next Government policy, and all it can cite in support of the necessity of such a course is the conduct of two leaders of the late opposition, who were actuated doubtless by motives which they believed to be right. Surely this ia not sufficient to bring about a change in the privileges of hon. members that might prove dangerous to the welfare of the community, and place a well meaning opposition at the mercy of an ironhanded majority. If there is to be reform of parliamentary procedure. Mesirs Bent and Gaunson, should they be returned, will have their powers of obstruction curtailed, in which case the Argus articlo is uncalled for. On the other haad, should the article affect its object and aecuro the rejection of the late members for Brighton and Emerald Hill, reform of parliamentary procedure which the journal in question so persistently advocates will become unnecessary. There is popular belief that the jealousy between Victoria and New South Wales ia not confined to the Statesmen of those two colonies alone. That something of the kind exists is evident from the recent telegraphic correspondence which has passed between Mr Dibbs and Mr Gillies in respect to the Canadian conference, and I have good reason to know that private individuals carry their colonial animosity to quite a ridiculous extent. It wa» only the other day I happened to be the enforced listener to a disputo between a Melbourne man and a Sydney man, as the respective merits of the two capitals. The debater from across the Murray was loud in his praises of Syd- j ney, and especially of the harbour, whilst the Victorian was equally eloquent on the subject of the Melbourne streets, the buildings and the trame. "We are ahead of you in everything" at last assorted the latter with a confident smack on the table which denoted that he was certain of it. " I beg your pardon " as vigorously replied the Sydneyite " you are not indeed—on the contrary we are greatly ahead of you and what's more we always will be. " You are not prepared to wager on it" challenged my fellow citizen " I am " said the other eagerly, "and can prove it too." Both men took out their sovereign cases and each placed five coins in my hand—as the holder of the stake. "Now then" asked the Melbourne champion " in what manner are you ahead of ua in Sydney." "In the matter of time " was the reply " twenty-two minutes certainly." And as I banded him over the ten sovereigns he walked oxultingly to the bar and called for a bottle of Dry Monopole.