NEW ZEALAND AND THE CORONATION.

Press, Volume LXVI, Issue 13907, 5 December 1910, Page 6

NEW ZEALAND AND THE CORONATION.

Sir Joseph Ward's statement regarding the representation of New Zealand at the' Coronation next year simply darkens the mystery that has surrounded this question for soma weeks past Early in October the Prime Minister of Australia received from the Secretary of State for the Colonies a communication in which it was stated that the Imperial Parliament "had de-

"eided to inrite eixtt-five iepresenta- " tiree of oversea dominions as gnests "of the nation. Australia;e delegation " was to consist ot eighteen members of " tho Federal Parliament. Upon arrival " in England each delegate would be i; the guest for a week of a member of the House of Commons." When that item of news was cabled to New Zealand, Sir Joseph Ward told a representative of the Wellington "Evening Post" that Xew Zealand had been invited to send eight representatives to the Coronation, but that the Cabinet had not considered the matter. A fortnight later, in response to some allusion by Mr T. E. Taylor in the House to the 'Coronation picnic," Sir Joseph explicitly contradicted the report. "Somebody," he asserted, " has given information away "' that was secret, but it did " not come from mc." To Mr Taylor's natural remark that if somebody had "given away information," the invitation must have been sent from England and received by tho Premier, Sir Joseph replied that no such invitation had been received. That statement ho repeated in the House on Saturday, adding that he was not able to speak on the question, as it. had come before him quite confidentially. Hβ mentioned the ,possibility of an invitation coming af"ter the general elections at Home were over. There the matter rests at present. Tho Commonwealth Parliament is sending its eighteen representatives, the Labour Party being allotted eleven and the Opposition seven. Ministers and Whips being excluded. Accepting the Premier's statements in tho House, we must believe that, whatever the intentions of the Imperial Parliament may have been, no invitation to the Domiuion to send a party of politicians Home has yet come this way. The reason for thie apparently differential treatment of Australia and New Zealand is not discernible, and wo suggest that Sir Joseph Ward should explain the situation aa soon as possible. We fail to see why there should be such a mystery about a tolerably simple matter.