Page:Life·of·Seddon•James·Drummond•1907.pdf/360

 was only 800,000, and it was hardly able to take up such a tremendous burden; it would be a piece of heartless cruelty to pay the pensions for a few years and then withdraw them; the scheme was likely to discourage the thrifty and encourage the thriftless in their bad ways; it would speedily create an army of sturdy beggars; it offered no incentive to work, and men and women would just wait for the time when the pension would be due; it would detract from the self-reliant spirit that was necessary in the working classes; New Zealand might have the hollow honour of leading the English-speaking people in establishing Old Age Pensions, but it would be making itself a laughing-stock for the whole world; in any case, the scheme was only an extension of the charitable aid system, and there was nothing more demoralising than to encourage people to throw themselves on the State in their old age; they must be encouraged to practice thrift and self-reliance. The strongest attack against the scheme, however, was made on the ground that it did not provide for individual contributions, and did not apply to all aged people. Sir William Russell urged these points strongly, and he was well supported. “If we specially bring up our people to rely entirely on the State and thereby encourage pure Socialism, it will tend to destroy our civilisation,” he said, “while if we bring them up not to rely on the State, but on their own endeavours, it will advance our civilisation. I believe that the Socialistic methods now preached throughout the world will, if allowed to prevail, gradually destroy our civilisation.”

Again the Bill passed its second reading with a large majority; but in committee it had a stormy passage. There is probably no measure on the colony’s Statute Book that has been so battered and torn. Eighty-nine amendments were moved, and 945 speeches were made, Mr. Seddon contributing 147. The House again decided that the pension should be granted to all old people. Mr. Seddon said that in that case he would again drop the Bill. Members, however, were in a very rebellious mood. In opposition to his wish, they said that the Bill should be gone on with, and one member offered to take the chair at the table and pilot the Bill through, as an affirmation