The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News and The Echo. MONDAY, DECEMBER 10, 1923. BRITAIN'S VERDICT.

Auckland Star, Volume LIV, Issue 294, 10 December 1923, Page 4

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

MONDAY, DECEMBER 10, 1923. BRITAIN'S VERDICT.

Per the ceute Ihmt Irnek* auistantm. For the wrong that need* reaiatan—, For f*e future in the dittenee, 4ntf lAβ fOMt thmt tee can 4*.

•Varus. Varus, jrive mc back hit legions:" the grief-stricken Augustus is said to have exclaimed when he heard that the army under that general had been deetroyed in the forests of Germany. Some of the stalwarts of the

Conservative party must be reproaching Mr. Baldwin with similar words. The Prime Minister's miscalculation was profound. He expected a majority over the other parties combined, but the country has put him—with thirteen results to come—in a minority of 84. The party lias suffered a net loss of 91 seats. We cannot recall so serious a miscalculation by the party. Even in 1010. when the Conservatives challenged the Liberals over the Budget, they had the satisfaction of reducing greatly the Liberal majority. The results of this election illustrate afresh the difficulty of forecasting and the unreliability of the opinion of the London clubs. The Liberals were also out in their calculations. The liberal forecast of the party's strength was given as 240, though Mr. Lloyd Gcorjfe put it at only 160. What upeet these Liberal calculations were the gains of Labour. The party forecast pave Labour 120, and Mr. Lloyd George gavp it 140, but Labour has won 197 scats. Labour gained seats not only from the Conservatives, but from the Liberals, and has delighted its supporters by exceeding by nearly thirty seats the. party estimate. Labour is entitled to rejoice, but wise men in the party will bear in mind the advantages under which the party fought as compared witli the Liberals. AH through ihe Coalition period the Labour party worked to extend its organisation and preach its gospel. The Liberal party's educative work was crippled by the existence of the Coalition: when the Coalition came to an end the party remained divided; and union came only on the eve of this election, it is noteworthy, by tlie way, that while Mr. Lloyd George was the most conspicuous platform figure on the Liberal side, his wing of the party is reported to have been

"practically extinguished."' and certainly the casualties among his distinguished followers were striking.

Some of those who describe the position as unprecedented possibly forgpt the times when the Nationalist party held the balance of power between liberals and Conservatives. To-day, however, there are three strong parties, all of which aspire to govern, but none of which can do go without help from one of the other*.' and whereas the Nationalist party had one objective and oniy one—Home Rule—all these parties have extensive programmes. Mr. Baldwin's constitutional course would seem to be resignation. He has asked for a mandate, and the verdict has gone against him. fie might argue that his duty would he done if he drops Protection, but even then he would have to face a hostile House, and could carry on only with support from the Opposition parties. If he resigns the King will send for Mr. Mac Donald. And here we may deprecate the slur on the Labour party involved in the ''Daily Telegraph's" comment that it is the duty of ''the two constitutionalist parties" to come together. The leaders of the Labour party have proclaimed over and over again their adherence to constitutional methods, and there is no reason to doubt their sincerity. Suggestions to the contrary come badly from the organ of the party that was prepared to support civil war a few years ago. But if Mr. Mac Donald is sent for what will he do? If he wishes to form a Government lie

must know before he sets about it what the Liberals' attitude will be. Officials of the party are reported to be emphatic against co-operation, and the "Daily Herald," which represents the Left of the party, scornfully rejects the idea of a Coalition. The "Herald's" plan is to let the other two parties form a Coalition, thereby attract Opposition elements to Labour, and "sweep the board." The Liberal party will have something to say to this; for one thing, from now on its organisation will be steadily improved. But in the event of Labour taking up this attitude Liberals are in this difficulty, that they cannot consent to make it quite impossible for the King's Government to be carried on, and now that the question of Protection versus Free Trade has been settled there wilt be that much less difference between Conservatism and .Liberalism. The Liberal party could go a long way with

Labour, for the foreign and domestic policies of the two parties—notwithstanding the ungenerous comment of the ".Daily Herald , ' —have much in common.

Liberalism, however, will net stand for the capital levy, or for 'Socialism as the Socialist understands the term. The only thing that is clear in all this confusion is that some arrangement between two of the parties will have to be made. The Government must be carried on. No one can serioiuly wish to see euch rapid changes of Government as Continental politics have sometimes produced, or another general election immediately. If there is not a Coalition there must be an understanding by which the Government will be supported along certain lines. In the circumstances that policy is likely to have a strong progressive colouring. For nothing emerges morp clearly from this election—not even the vote against Free Trade—than the fact that the antiConservative forces are in a majority in Parliament. Only inability to agree will prevent them from making use of their position to obtain further instalments of social reform.