The Press. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1885.

Press, Volume XLII, Issue 6247, 26 September 1885, Page 2

The Press. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1885.

In reviewing the work of the session, the other day, we showed that, although Ministers had failed to cany their policy measures, they had contrived to escape a direct vote of want of confidence. From the first days of the session to the close of it they met with scarcely anything but defeat. Yet they are in office still. This anomalous state of affaire has arisen from the strange confusion into which parties in the House have fallen. When the present Government was formed in 1884, it was at once eeen that party Government, as the term is usually understood, had been suspended; The Ministry undertook the difficult task of framing a policy which would prove acceptable to both sections of their following. No one expected that much could ba accomplished daring the seseion of 1884, and the House showed itself willing to give the new Government every latitude. Daring the recess, however, the Ministers showed a decided tendency to disagree on important points of policy. The Premier's Auckland speech, it is well known, gave the greatest offence to a considerable section of the Ministerial party. Oα that occasion he gave utterance to principles which shocked a great many who were re* sponflible for placing him in office and for retaining him in power. Other things happened daring the recess to rouse the temper of the Ministerial following, and to make them critical and watchful. Accordingly, when the House met, members were on the alert. The promised Ministerial programme was looked forward to with considerable interest and curiosity. The Financial Statement more than justified the worst fears of those who went up to Wellington with a vague expectation of impending danger. The two main ideas which it expressed were extravagant borrowing and the bolstering up of local industries by means of the tariff. The scheme of local finance which it embodied was devised for the express purpose of encouraging the local bodies to enter upon a career of borrowing of the most reckless nature. The tariff increases were proposed with the double object of securing the support of the thorongh-going Protectionists, and of providing the means for carrying extravagant and expensive fashion. The Budget was constructed under the impression that the public coald be roused into enthusiasm in favor of a wild and rccilees policy. Never perhaps on any former occasion baa a Ministry shown such a total misconception of .the feelings and opinions iof conotry. Instead of being attracted by, the proposals, the people were seriously alarmed at the prospect before them. It was known that there were difficulties in the way of forming a stable Government, should the present occupants of the Treasury benches be turned out. It was thought by some that owing to the chaotic state of parties, Ministers might contrive to have their own way, and force upon the country a number of most mischievous measures. Bat, as events happened, these fears proved groundless. A Committee of Pablic Sdfaty was formed for the protection of the public' and its members were a.la to d j the community a great public eorvice. In the course of the debate on tho first sonconfidence motion Ministers received a pretty clear intimation of the state of feeling in the House. Bat they failed to realise the extent of ihe revolt against them, and blindly rushed upon their fate. They agreed to modify their tariff proposals somewhat, bat they still adhered to their determination to force upon the country a Protectionist policy. They brought down their amended resolutions, and invited the House to pass them. Members as promptly showed what their opinions were by rejecting, with one or two exceptions, the proposed increases. At a meeting the [following day with their angry followers, they were told in plain terms that they must withdraw their tariff and abandon their local borrowing projects, or they must suffer the conse-j quences of a refusal. They elected to withdraw their policy and retain their seats. This was naturally a severe blow to their prestige and influence. They ceased to be the leaders of the House, and fell into the position of its* servants. Still the majority were notprepared to turn them oat of office. Tfiis was proved by what happened later on, whau the feeling of dissatisfaction grew to Euch an extent that great efforts were made, on the part of the die-; satisfied, to come to some arrangement which might rusalc in a direct vote of? want of confidence being carried. But the negotiations failed, and finally Major Atkinson agreed to move a series of resolutions equivalent to a vote of want of confidence. After a sharp debate, the first resolution was defeated by a considerable majority. But an amendment, moved by Mr. Hislop, as representing the Third Party, was only lost by four votes—theee'votes representing the Maori members. In the course of that debate, Ministers were again told in plain terms that they were being permitted to retain office, not because a majority believed in them or trnsted in them, but because the House did not see their way to place another set of men in their place at present. Then came Captain Bussell's resolution in favour of economy. No more complete expression of want of confidence in the Government could have been given than the carrying of that resolution. After it was agreed to the economists, with the assistance of the Ganterbury members, proceeded to pot it into practice, and the Government again received to treat the decision a* not expressing want of confidence in them. Their humiliation had been so complete already that it was scarcely worth wftfle making a wry face over an additional rebuff.

It will thus be seen that the principal work of the eeaeion has eonaiited in deejxpvfeg the M3nie l *rifl meaearea w«tl>o»% at-the same vine, turning the Government oat of office. In doing so tin House baa east to tee winds all tsoneiitutional iie?g»ev and widely peparted from 4he rales which usually gwde PArliamentary government. But, ia aeticg as they have done, membere hay* performed a great public eervice to the oolony. If the principles o£ patty Government have been Ignored, tfce country baa. been saved from the mischievous and dangerous echemea | which the Miniatere attempted to introI duce. Iα consenting to retain o£Bee I after their policy was rejected, the Government h»ve pieced.themselves in a most naeiiviable posiuon. That, however, is their affair. If they think they have got through the session with credit .to themselves they must have curious Ideas on the eubject. What the publio have to be thankful fer ifl, that if Ministers are in office still, they have been largely deprived of their powers of doing mischief.

A most important report has recently been prepared for submission to the Imperial Parliament. It is the result of the labors of a Committee called into existence by Mr. Chambebiaiw, to inquire into the question of the loading of veusela. The Committee consisted of two members of tie Board of Trade, a member of- the Committee of Lloyd's Register office, representatives of shipbuilding and shipowner*, a Professorot Naval Architecture in Glasgow University, one of the chief constructors of the navy, md Sir Reed as Chairman. Tae report of the Load Line Committee, as it is called, was not published when the last mail left,bat the Times of August 13th was able to give a full outline of the cot elusions. The question the Committee has been .considering is of very great importance, not only to the people of Great Britain, but to the mercantile community in the colonies also. The questions referred to the Committee (says the Times) were of the most general character. " Roughly stated, they were these :—Can any fixed rules or tables for determining the loading of merchant vessels cow be adopted, without unduly interfering with trade P If so, what rules or tables, and what amount of discretion will be requisite in applying them P The answers which have been given by the Committee virtually are that fixed rales and tables may now be adopted and enforced without unduly interfering with trade; that the fonr sets of tables sub' milted by the Committee—for flushdeck, spar - deck, and awning - deck steamers respectively, and for sailiDg vessels—are suitable for adoption ; and that in applying them discretion is chiefly necessary in dealing with ships of inferior quality or condition, and in dealing with extremely exceptional and novel kinds of ships. The tables submitted define the free-boards for vessels of the highest class in Lloyd's register, and it is in'ended that vessels of inferior strength, whether classed or nnclassed, should be somewhat less loaded, the difference of loading conforming to a fixed principle, viz, that the materials of which they are built shall not undergo more strain per square inch midship part than that which undergo. It is considered that this principle, while insuring safe loading and [setting up a definite standard of comparison, will not materially restrict the loading of well built ships ef a somewhat lower class than the highest in Book." The Committee have also dealt with the questions '" whether the principle of reserving out of water a definite percentage of the vessel's total buoyancy as a means of causing her to lift with waves sufficiently for safety should be enforced, or whether thai; of securing a safe height of the platform on deck upon which the seamen are exposed in heavy weather should in the main prevail," and they have framed their tables so as to meet both requirements. They recommend that, in the event of Parliament agreeing to the enforcement of a compulsory bad line, that the law should be made to apply to foreign as well as British ships frequenting British and colonial ports. They are also of opinion that a representative Board ehonld be created to enforce the law in Great Britain. Constituted as £he Committee was, the report is undoubtedly one of very large importance. The conclusions arrived at are those of men of wide experience and knowledge. When, the Times points out, " the responsible and working officers of the Board of Trade, the officers of Lloyd's and of the Liverpool Registries, an Admiralty representative, a number of eminently practical shipbuilders and shipowners, and men of the highest skill and eminence in naval architecture, all combine in saying that all descriptions of cargo-carrying vessels may have their leading regulated in a definite and detailed manner, without undue interference with trade, neither Parliament nor the Government need' greatly hesitate to make moderate loading iacumbont upon all shipowners."