Evening Post. TUESDAY, APRIL 9, 1889. THE MINISTERIAL BREAK-UP.

Evening Post, Volume XXXVII, Issue 84, 9 April 1889, Page 2

Evening Post. TUESDAY, APRIL 9, 1889. THE MINISTERIAL BREAK-UP.

Tick facts which we were enabled to publish yestorday in regard to the Ministerial di&" ruption (and they are facts, as will in due time be established, despite disingenuous efforts to diaoredit their authenticity) will, no doubt, have opened the eyea of the public to the manner in which they are governed. We do not think the information so gained will increase public respect for the present Ministry. It would, no doubt, have suited tho Ministry that the public should, as our contemporary puta it, havo had "to wait awhile for the true account of the_ late resignation," but to our mind it is desirable that the true account of the secret proceedings Bhould be made public while tho public facts connected therewith are still fresh in men's minds. It is no doubt highly inconvenient that _we should bare held and acted on such a belief. As to thero not being " tho fainteßt shadow of uncertainty" about the power of the Premier to dismiss a colleague, we may say that we havo the opinion of one of the ablest constitutional lawyers in New Zealand, who i 3 also a very experienced politician, for saying that the Premier has no such power. Ministers hold their appointments direct from tho Crown, not from the Premier, and the Crown only can dismiss. It is not the custom for the Crown to exercise its power of dismissal on account of s-ny personal or political disagreements in Cabinet,- of which properly it should know nothing. The dismissal of an individual Minister by the Crown would imply that (and, indeed, could only bo justified by) the Minister (in question having been guilty of some personal misconduct, which rendered him unworthy of continuing to be one of the Crown's advisers. It would distinctly convey a Blur of personal misconduct of a grave character Hiß Excellency the Acting Governor is too sound a lawyer, and experienced an official, to cast suoh a slur upon any of his advisers without the fullest enquiry and the most conclusive evidence. We navo some reason to believe that in the present case he most properly and distinctly refused to adopt any such a courso, upon the facts laid before him, which revealed nothing more than personal or political disagreement between his advisers. Tho proper constitutional courso in suoh a position, iB, if the Minister will not resign voluntarily, for the Premier himself to resign, a proceeding which is, by unwritten law, accepted as terminating the existence of a Ministry, and involving the resignation of all the members of tho Ministry originally appointed on his recommendation. When snch a step is taken, and the Governor is informed that the object is to got rid of a colleague or colleagues, he usually confides tho task of reconstruction to the resigning Premier ; but this might not be done if any large section of his former colleagues would not or could not act again with him. Tho empty threat with which our morning contemporary concludes its misleading and incorrect article ik eminently characteristic of the inspiration under which it wob written. Who but a bully ever boasts aftor tho ovont, of tho terrible things ho would have done had he not been prevented? The Premier's procliviticß aro sufficiently well-known. As to the donial of our statement that Sir Harry Atkinson saw Sir William Fitzherbert on Sunday in reference to tho situation, we reiterate it with a full knowledge of the facts. As to the Premier's intention in going to the Hutt, we pun, of course, know nothing. The intention can only be judged from the act, but it is a singular fact that the mounted messenger who was engaged in carrying to the Hutt the telegrams from the Acting-Governor know prociaoly where to find the Premier at the Hutt.