The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News and The Echo. WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 1903. THE CABINET CRISIS.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXIV, Issue 239, 7 October 1903, Page 4

The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News and The Echo.

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 1903. THE CABINET CRISIS.

For the cause that lacks assistance, For the wrong that needs resistance, Vor the future in the distance. And the good tltat ice can do.

The resignation of the Duke of Devonshire still further reduces the strength of the Balfour Administration, but this loss can hardly be described as unexpected. The President of the Council, like most British politicians., was born and bred in {lie Cobdenife school, and it was not to he hoped that after his close identification with the free-trade policy for so many years he would lightly surrender iiis convictions. TV.; Duke has apparently waited in some hesitation for Mr. Balfour to declare himself definitely; and the speech delivered at the Sheffield Conference last week seems to have dispelled, any lingering doubts m the minds of the Liberal-Unionist as to the Premier's ultimate, intentions. As a matter of fact, Mr. Balfour's speech goes very little if anything beyond the terms of his manifesto, cabled three weeks ago. He has now decided that a preferential ! tariff would be advisable if it were prac- : Licable, and that it would have to take the form of a tax on food. So far he is entirely at one with Mr. Chamberlain; and ihe reservation to the effect that he does not think that the time has yet come for such a step has no! bf-en

enough to satisfy the scruples of the Duke of Devonshire.

The Cabinet certainly suffers a serious loss through the retirement of the President of the Council. As Marquis of llar-

tiiigton and as Duke of Devonshire his

long experience of British politics and his unblemished personal reputation made iiim :>. powerful ally in Parliamentary

warfare: and the magnanimity with which at different times he waived his persona; claims to party leadership in favour of Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Balfour won him respect even from his political opponent--. Mr. Balfour has less reason to regret the defection of Mr. Ritchie and Lord George Hamilton. The late Chancellor of the Exchequer has declared himself an irreconcilable Free Trader of the extreme school, and his withdrawal of the com duty, merely because, though it had not raised the price of bread, it had hurt the feelings of the Cobdciiites, is a sufficient, indication of the policy that he desires to maintain. Lord Hamilton has infinitely less capacity than Mr. Ritchie, and as Secretary for India has made perhaps more blunders than any of his colleagues. But it is unfortunate that the circumstances of these two resignations should seem to suggest a certain lack of candour on the part of the Prime Minister. If it is true that certain members of the Cabinet resigned because Mr. Chamberlain continued to be a member of the Ministry, and that the resignations were accepted when the Premier had been already notified of Mr. Chamberlain's intention to withdraw, Mr. Balfour's attitude is certainly difficult to explain. But on the other hand both Lord Hamilton and Mr. Ritchie specifically stale that t'.iey resigned because 1 hoy regard Mr. Balfour's attitude as likely to compromise free trade; and after all it is difficult to see how, holding the views they have expressed, they i-ould continue to work in sympathy with him.

The position of the .Ministry is certainly weakened by .all these changes. The appointment oi' the Hon. A. Lyttelton to the post lately held by Mr Chamberlain is somewhat surprising. Mr Brodrick fills Lord Hamilton's place at the India Office; and as "Mr Brodrick, on

account of his attempt to levy war expenses on India, is probably the worst hated man in India to-day, this choice is not likely to conciliate that great dependency. But. after all. with a large working majority in the House. Mr Balfour still holds the key to the situation; and the fate of the party seems now to depend upon the course that he will finally decide to lake. His speech at the Sheffield Conference a few days ago, though still somewhat colourless, suggests that if Mr. Chamberlain can persuade the constituencies to accept a food tax.Mr Balfour will be prepared to adopt the whole of the Colonial Secretary's programme. This Sheffield Conference was in itself one of the most notable episodes of the struggle inaugu-. rated by Mr Chamberlain. A body of ICO members of Parliament and 2000 delegates from political associations declared enthusiastically in favour of fiscal reform. Mr Chaplin's motion in favour of Mr Chamberlain's demand for preferential tariffs was withdrawn out of respect to the Prime Minister's remonstrance; though Mr Balfour's covert threat that if it were persevered in he might feel compelled to resign strikes us as neither wise nor dignified. But Mr Chamberlain, not Mr Balfour, was the hero of the occasion. The Prime Minister's refusal to endorse the food fax was received in deep silence, in strong contrast to the enthusiastic cheering that greeted the eulogy of the late Colonial Secretary and the exposition of his policy of Imperial Reciprocity. At present, in spite of the longestablished predominance of the Cobdcnites, it-would seem that Mr Chamberlain enters-upon his Preference propaganda .with every hope of success. The facts,

and the evidence, we believe, are wholly on his side: his personal influence aud the activity of the Tariff Reform League will go a long way in his favour: and if Mr Balfour, with his now weakened and divided Ministry, can maintain his position for the next twelve months. Mr Ghambe'rlaiii will doubtless he aide to supply him with convincing proofs that in spite of the Premier's apprehensions, the food tax is already well within the range of practical politics.