The Press. FRIDAY, MAY 27, 1910. THE PRIME MINISTER'S REPLY.

Press, Volume LXVI, Issue 13744, 27 May 1910, Page 6

The Press. FRIDAY, MAY 27, 1910. THE PRIME MINISTER'S REPLY.

The two speeches delivered by Sir Joseph Ward'at Hokitika on Wednesday called, in the" one case for some imaginative grace, in the other for plain, solid facts. The Prima Ministor's utterances -wore marked by these differing qualities, but unfortunately in the wrong order. In his elegy on Mr Seddon, in which ho might -well have shown 'some appreciation of the really romantic career of his former leader. Sir Joseph was dull and turgid, and apparently chiefly anxious to tell the Hokitika people facts about Mr Seddon's life with which they are probably more familiar than he is. The touch of imagination, which would havo been so appropriate in tho afternoon utterance, strayed somehow into tha socalled policy speech at night, and played havoc -with the speaker's alleged facts. '.It is, of course, nothing now— for that matter there is little new in the whole speech—to be told, practically in so many words, that the whole credit for any beneficial legislation is due to the Government, and that the Opposition are entitled tg none. It is an effort of pure imagination, but Sir Joseph Ward has repeated ib so often that it is quite prcbabla that he has begun to believe it. As a matter of fact, many of tho Governments me_siires have been filched from the Opposition/, and tho process is stili going on. The Prime iiliuister quote* the amounts paid to various papers 'or Government advertising, and provw to his own satisfaction that the advertisements are distributed impartially, . Yet this seme of im,p_.rtiality permitted the Government to pay the "Dominion" £176. while the Government organ in Wellington received £1031. The fact that xhe evening paper in Wellington -was paid £1076 has nothing to do with the question; the discrepancy between the tivo morning papers, by which tho ono that criticises tho Government receives one-sixth o!:" the Government advertising that is given to the other disposes altogether of the Premier's boasted impartiality. Si:- Joseph pointed out that the Government daily papers he mentioned were paid altogether £3584, while the Opposition papers received £3789, but he forgot to add that the numbers of the papers on each side wero not tho same, and tliat the average worked out ■—Government papers £716 each, Op position -papers £631 each. We bave no doubt tlie same method of distribution will continue, but to call it impartial is to misuse the term. Sir Joseph -would have the public believe that the Opposition tvas so inconsistent as to object to retrenchment while protesting against it cessation. That again is a flight of imagination. The only criticism tho Opposition made with regard to tho promised retrenchment in the cost of the public service was that if Dioper precautions had been taken

against extravagance, it would not have been necessary. Wo protested .-.gainst the announced determination of tho Government to drop all pretence at retrenchment Ixr-causo the necessity for economical administration is just as great as ever io was. and because the retrenchment that has been -effected is largely imaginary. The final result of tho year's operations was that the revenue increased by £237,076 and thr- expenditure by £20.5,409. The Prime Minister points with pride to the "saving" of £08,000 in departmental expenditure. But his most convenient trick of forgetfulness enables him to omit all reference to the-methods by which this saving, ••effected," ns he say*?,

by enormous work by the Govern-

'" raent"' _-a.s really brought about. The"• Dominion"' recently supplied the emission, by showing that most of it was due to the absence from last year's

accounts of non-recurring items of expenditure in th.c- previous year. The Premier, in fact, has been taking credit for savings that were really to a very large extent not due to rf trencbinent at all. Sir Joseph jeered at the criticisms that wine Opposition mem--hers had passed upon the Midland Railway, but have none of his followers ever spoken against it? "We fancy it would not he difficult to quote some rather damaging passages from "Hansard" to that effect. Tor the most part, however, the spe?ch was a repetition of assertions that the Prime Minister has made before, cnrefullv selected for the consumption of a West Coast audience. He in ay declare that the Opposition have not n '•Buckley's hope," whatever, that may he, of getting into oflk-e, hut his alacrity in following up the Leader of the Opposition suggests that his mind is not quite easy on the subject.