CALLED BACK-BUT SOT YET,

Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume II, Issue 298, 14 May 1889, Page 2

CALLED BACK-BUT SOT YET,

If it is not a satisfactory contemplation it is at least a conclusive one, that Sir Robert Stout has no present intention of again taking a leading part in the political arena, He not only has no such present intention, but he significantly adds: “I must say that the longer 1 remain out of politics the ieg-g inclination I feel for entering public life again." Perhaps it is unfortunate that Sir Robert Stopt should be so inclined, for we can ill afford to be without the services of such men, even if it is only in the cool shades of Opposition, but it would seem like an inspiration of Providence if a great many of our politicians became similarly inclined, and forthwith acted upon their inclinations. If a number of them would only emigrate and make a lengthened stay in the Kermadic Island, or some other equally secluded sphere, they might gtfrve their fellow countrymen better that way' than by continuing to grape us with their presence. But as there is no present prospect of the colony being so fortunate we may

■efer back to our starting point, and not iorget Sir Robert Stout. “ The Young New Zealand Party,” he says, “ has shown no national enthusiasm, and it has made what it calls ‘economy’ (I call it ‘parsimony’) its god. It is a poor deal for a party, and is a will-o’-the-wisp, not a star, to guide them.” And so, in this concise form, we have the views of Sir Robert Stout, the great preacher on “political ideals.” For our star he would have us take the Bankruptcy Court, and our Liberalism

should consist in borrowing all we can, and then if the fates are against us (as any practical man knows they have been and would be) we could console ourselves by abusing the money lenders for ruining us—that is, if we could not succeed in ruining them first. This devil-may-care policy we hope will never form a prominent feature in future New Zealand Liberalism, though w'e are not at all sure that it has not tainted it in the past. The greedy scramble for the loaves and fishes, in days that are past, fortunately perhaps, left but a poor chance for the development of healthy Liberalism. The money has all gone, and the evil has been left for present and future generations to combat with. But Sir Robert is not content w'ith a manly and honest attempt to retrieve the lost position. He sneers at economy as being only a deceptive name for “parsimonious Conservatism.” The experience of the past justifies us in the belief that Sir Robert Stout is sincere in his professed antipathy for economy. There was a time when he had an opportunity of practical illustration, when his Government left behind a deficit of for the struggling taxpayers to replenish. A little sober proof of this kind soon dislodges the airy fabric of fanciful conception. If only New Zealand could be effectually purged of the borrowing mania and the monstrous jobbery which is its evil companion, we might hope to reform even Sir Robert Stout himself, and utilise his talents jn a much higher cause than of plunging the colony in ruin ; the cause of unsaddling the people of the colony of their cruel burden of taxation, of making them prosperous and happy, and of rewarding energy and toil with some better result than that of increasing its struggles. Those taxpayers are now gradually awakening to the true position, and in that is our best hope for the future. In the meantime, while the colony is gradually pulling itself together again, we can well afford to leave Sir Julius Vogel to employ his time peacefully in the writing of novels or whatever occupation he may choose, and Sir Robert Stout in his profitable profession of the law. Now is not the time for fanciful politics—we want practical men ; as it is we are very poorly served, but better remain at that than go from bad to worse.