THE MEMBER FOR CHRISTCHURCH NORTH.

Press, Volume LXVI, Issue 13906, 3 December 1910, Page 8

THE MEMBER FOR CHRISTCHURCH NORTH.

Sir Joseph Ward must have listened with mixed feelings to Mr T. E. Taylor's protest against the publication of a certain pamphlet. For he, of all men, probably had the liveliest recollection of Mr Taylor's action some years ago to which the attention of the public is now called. On Wednesday the member for Christchurch Xorth found, in a tolerably full vocabulary of vituperation, no words too strong to use in I denouncing the pamphlet and all connected with it, among whom, -with characteristic ability in the art of innuendo, he endeavoured to include the Opposition Party. Without actually going so far as to accuse them of being directly responsible for it, he contrived, as he no doubt intended, to convey the impression that he believed they were mixed m> with it in some way. He declared that the innuendoes in the pamphlet were scandalous, and protested vehemently that' he "could "never support methods that were not "absolutely straightforward and above ü board." As the Premier listened to this attempt to make use of a gross and cowardly attack upon himself as a weapon against his political opponents, he must have remembered—what most of us had forgotten—that the speakerwas the same man who voluntarily acted as chairman of a public meeting in 1905, at which attacks of the same kind were made upon him. Referring scornfully to the incident, Sir Joseph asked Mr Taylor in the House whether he thought it was a proper action to preside over the meeting of a man who had tried to blackmail him. Apparently Mr Taylor, who now professes such solicitude for the Premier's feelings, I saw nothing improper then in lending the support of his presence to Sir Joseph's assailant. Apparently he sees nothing inconsistent now in denouncing the publication of allegations ■which he openly countenanced years ago. The Premier, no doubt, assessed Mr Taylor's cham,pionship of him. the other day at its true value. For he is sufficiently experienced to recognise that Mr Taylor's support is no help to j any man. With all his acuteness and ability, with all his admitted power as a speaker , , the member for Christchurch North is, as another member said j the other day, "a spent force." It is as if, at the outset of his career, the doom had been pronounced upon him, " Unstable as water, thou shalt not "excel." Few men in Parliament exercise less influence upon their fellow members than he does. It is fourteen years since he was first elected, but he has never yet sat in two successive Parliaments, a striking fact which bears out the truth of the "Do- j minion's" remark that no one has done Mr Taylor greater injury than himself. His speeches are often interesting, sometimes brilliant, but though they dazzle his unthinking hearers at election meetings, they carry much less weight in the House thau those of members ,possessing not one-twentieth of his oratorical ability. At one time he was greatly admired by a section of the public because he was a thorn in the- Government's side, but after all, a thorn fulfils no useful purpose in that direction. It only creates a rankling wound. In the country Mr Taylor still retains a faithful following; in Parliament he sits alone. His bid for the leadership of the Labour Party seems to have failed, his bitter tongue intensifies political differences, his unbalanced judgment brings disaster on his fri<j»ids, and today he presents that most tragic figure the man who might have been.