The Dominion MONDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1911. MINISTERS AND PATRONAGE.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1050, 13 February 1911, Page 4

The Dominion MONDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1911. MINISTERS AND PATRONAGE.

The reply, of Mn. Miixah. to the strictures published in tho llailwwj Officers Advocate upon the appointment of his son to a lucrative P ost that has just been created >in tho • ltaihvay Department, was hot as satisfactory as most people would like It was urged by tho correepondents of tho Advocate that tho,' appointment—which carries with it tho reversion of a pretty high place in ... tno , seryicc^was-:, warranted neither by tho young man's service or; qualifications. The Minister has not really 'met' this criticism, and lie not noticed tho further' complaint that there aro men in tho service extremely, well equipped for the •post—far better 'equipped than tho actual appointee—further than to say that ho was informed that' there was no other ma'ri in the scrvico with tho necessary qualifications. This is asuggestion-difficult to credit, as wo-havo no doubt tho Advocate's cor-: respondents'will show in'due l)ut that_ Mit,, believed his informant- nobody . will* question'. Most people will believe/ , also, 'that Mn. Millar did ribfc request"or suggest that the appointment should bo .inade. But ho; really ought to , have reflected that it may occasionally happen that tho officers of a Department may suggest appointments that they think will help themselves into the favour of thoir Ministerial head. Wo do ilot r 'doubt his bon'a fides for a moment, and wo' aro sorry to have to discuss ithis matter at all. It is not out-.ofariy ill will towards. Mn. Millar—for {Whom, indeed, as arij administrator wo have moro .respect,' although \yo unfortunately have to criticise him a,great deal, than for' most .of his colleagues—but becauso a very important .principle is involved that we have • written

upon-tho subject. / "If," says tho Mjnister, "the fact of niy being a .Minister of tho' Crown is going to debar my child from'-the ordinary avenues of- employment, opon to every other person m'-'Now Zealand,

i am riof going tp stand in their way by remaining a Minister." It surely,, does not require much in tho way of argument to show that tho principles of good government do requiro that tho near relatives of a' Minister should bo debarred from such employment in tho public service—which, by tho way, is quite apart from "tho ordinary avenues of employment." ~

And now there is another aspect of the affair that calls* for discussion. Ono of tho chief organs of tho Govornmont in tho south has criticised Mr. MiLLA.n, vory sharply, and has done it in such a way as to suggest that this Minister is not so , well regarded by the wire-pullers: of the Liberal party as are the rest of his colleagues. That tho journal wo are referring to should in any circum-. stances Appear'as. a hostile critic of. tho Government is .so remarkable

that we. must look with_ suspicion tfpoh its criticism on this occasion.

It says that it "cannot recall many flagrant cases of nepotism in Now' Zealand," but that, it adds, "is because the vast, majority of our Ministers have taken the view of. public, appointments that we.should like to see Mn. Mimn.tnking," namely, tho view that relatives of a Minister should be debarred from appointment to tho branches of the servico

Xtor .that - Minister's immediate trol. With the unfairness of this suggestion—for it is unquestionably unfair to endeavour to make Mn. Millar the scapegoat of Liberalism —wo need not concern ourselves. If ho has been placed in a difficult posi-' tion, it is partly his own fault, but partly also 'because the' past—and for that matte? the present—practice of Liberalism has perverted the principles of the Departments. '.No doubt Mr.. Millar , is blameworthy for not having considered the effect of an appointment which may have been wrbDgly recommended,' but which'was doubtless sanctioned in good faith., The critic which cannat now "recall' many flagrant cases of nopotism" in Now. Zealand has "for many years had only ill words for those who_ have pointed out the extent to which the Liberal party in the-past-has cultivated nopotism, favouritism, , and patronage. For our own part wo do not regard nepotism, ns' a worse evil than the notorious- Liberal custom of conferring improper appointments and promotions upon tho friends of Ministers and their frionds , - friends rtnd upon the touts and, "heelers" of tho party.. Of late years there . have bscn, ; . particularly in respect of the Defcnco Department, frequent complaints of, log-rolling and favouritism, The pay-roll of the country ie

! thick with , nalnes that should never have been there, and that got there through the rendering of services to tho party in power. .-To come out at this late date and endeavour to present Mn, Millar as "creating a precedent that will lead to a less admirablo stiito of things in future" is not only an unfairness to tint Minister, but an insult to the public's intelligence. , ; The'appointment under notico was injudicious, but ni appointment that Mr. Millar could cvor make i could possibly be more impropor than several of tho appointments made by tho Seddon and Ward Governments.'