The Waikato Times AND THAMES VALLEY GAZETTE. THURSDAY, NOV. 3, 1892.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXIX, Issue 3177, 3 November 1892, Page 2

The Waikato Times AND THAMES VALLEY GAZETTE.

THURSDAY, NOV. 3, 1892.

Equal and exact justice to all men, # Of whatsoever state or persuasion, religious or political.

The Hon. Mr Reeves addressed a public meeting at Auckland on Saturday. He naturally defended the; policy of the Government, and reviewed the legislation of the past session, more particularly those measures which apply to the departments over which he presides. In referring to the abnormal length of the session, he alluded to the fact that four Ministers had succumbed under the mental and physical strain consequent on their position. He attributed the duration of the session to the Opposition; it would have been much nearer the truth to have attributed it to the impossible programme which Ministers put forth in order to court popularity with all sorts and conditions of men. The Opposition would have been neglectful of their duty had they not, to the best of their ability, delayed or prevented legislation which they believed would be inimical to the colony. If a Ministry attempts too much the fault is theirs, and not that of the Opposition, who insist upon measures being discussed. The responsibilities of opposition are only one degree less than those appertaining to office, and they become all the greater whun a Ministry has a blind and obedient majority at their back, willing to vote without question as the Whips direct, without having listened to the arguments urged either pro or con. We are told by correspondents that this was glaringly the case throughout the whole of" last session. It would be an interesting return giving the number of hours members were to bo found in their seats during the progress of debate. Mr Reeves dwelt at some length on the charges which had been brought against the Government, more particularly that of setting class against class. We are aware that this charge has been brought by many of our contemporaries, but never by us. We have, however, accused the Govermnant of imposing higher relative taxation on laud owners than upon any other class, and wr have substantiated our statement by figures. This, we emphatically" state, is class legislation in its worst and most onerous form, and calculated to have the effect of making one class jealous of all others. Mr Reeves, in defence, maintained that nearly all legislation is " class." When he instanced the extension of the franchise as coming under that category he must have known that he was putting an interpretation on the term which it could not bear having regard to its accepted meaning, which we take to be the conferring of a benefit on one set of people which justice does not demand, and that at the cost of another, to which justice demands that they should not be subjected. In further confutation of the charge of setting town against country, he tacitly admits that they have done rather much for the urban population by calling attention to the Bills which they have promoted for the benefit of the country. When we come to read the list down we shall find that the majority have been brought forward in obedience to town politicians. The Land for Settlements Bill and the Land Bill are certainly emanations from town brains or the conceptions of Ministers themselves. Much as every country settler with common sense desires to see the spare country occupied, no agitation has been evidenced by them ; on the other i hand, town agitators have been '< preaching various land doctrines to i secure the settlement of the coun-

try, not because they had any desire J to settle upon it themselves, but for the reason mainly that they were alive to tho fact that the towns were out of ail proportion to the number of settlers and the area of land under cultivation, and that the townspeople were being gradually forced to commercial cannibalism. Let us not be understood to condemn the measures. Our allusion to them was called forth by the claim that Mr Reeves has wrongly put forward that they have been passed for the gratification of settlers, and fjr their special benefit. M r Rerves asks : '"' Was it because of their enmity to the country that they had introduced a measure designed to aid in the irrigation of the dTy places in the South." We are not aware that anybody has accused them of enmity, what they are accused of is that country interests have been treated as of secondary consideration to those of the Trades Unionists. We may ask: Does any sane man feel enmity against the cow which yields the milk for his puddings, or if he has got common sense, does he grudge her the necessary supply of grass? There was one very important measure upon which Mr Reeves appears to have maintained the most discreet silence. He said not one word about the nice little addition to their salaries which the Ministry has put into the pockets of members. This was probably dangerous ground, he was speaking in the city of the " skin-fliots." He certainly could not have declaimed that tills was for the benefit of the country. It was avowedly voted in the interests of labour members — trade unionists — who know very little and care less about country interests unless they happen to run on parallel lines with their own. Mr Reeves is a clever young man and his speech in parts "was very good, both as regards matter and language, but it is somewhat to be wondered at that he should have put forth claims on behalf af the Government which were not sustainable by facts. His oxperionco should have taught him that exposure was inevitable.