Page:Life·of·Seddon•James·Drummond•1907.pdf/91

 goldfields,” he said once, at the conclusion of an exceptionally fierce attack, “the man who has the courage to fight for what he thinks is right is the man who is respected. I believe I have that courage, and I believe the Premier has it, and that is why we are both respected in New Zealand.”

What struck him most in regard to party politics then was that they had no right to exist. He endeavoured to get away from them; but, like many other young politicians, he found that he had to choose under which flag he would fight.

Although he believed that Liberalism and Conservatism had no real meaning here, he felt that the colony was divided by a distinct line of demarcation. “It is the rich and the poor; it is the wealthy people and the landowners against the middle classes and the labouring classes. That is the real position in New Zealand. Wealth has power, and wealth asserts its sway, and I call upon every man on the Opposition side of the House, who desires to do his duty, to prevent the representation of wealth on the Government benches to the detriment of the people.”

He was quite willing to work in a humble sphere, but he did not undervalue his services to Parliament any more than he undervalued his services to the County Council. He saw no virtue in making uncalled-for and unnecessary sacrifices. He always affirmed that the legislative labourer, like any other labourer, is worthy of his hire. When he first entered Parliament it was the practice for the House of Representatives to vote a sum of about £200 every session to each member of the House. This arrangement met with his strong disapproval. After two years experience of it, he introduced a Payment of Members Bill, which was framed on a measure in force in Victoria, and definitely fixed the honorarium, but he was not successful then in passing it through Parliament.

He was not afraid, even when retrenchment was the order of the day, to demand the sum he considered he had earned by his efforts. He watched repeated divisions on the question in the House, and was struck by the fact that wealthy members voted for a reduction of the honorarium, while poor members, like himself, asked that they should be paid in something like an