MINISTERIAL SHIRKING.

Evening Post, Volume XLII, Issue 92, 15 October 1891, Page 2

MINISTERIAL SHIRKING.

The Government have done an unprecedented and most cowardly thing in appointing a Commission of throe Civil servants to sit on tho Itov. Mr. De Castro, to determine whether ho is to be retained in the Civil Servico or not. Wo have not a word to say as to Mr. Do Castro's faults or merits, or whether ho should or should not remain a Civil servant. It is no moro Sur place to sit in judgmont Upon him in the first instance than it is properly that of any Commission. The responsibility of determining whether Mr. Do Castro's services can or cannot be advantageously retained by tho colony legitimately rests with Ministers. They cannot oscaiio it, and thoy havo no right to try and shirk their duty or to shuffle ofE their unpleasant responsibility upon other shoulders. It is utterly unfair to all concerned, to try and place this responsibility on three heads of departments. It is unjust to tho gentlemen upon whom tho nnpleasant duty is cast, to Mr. De Castro himself, to the Civil Sorvice at large, and to the people whoso servants both Ministers and. the members of the servico are. In ordinary cases of alleged misconduct on the part of a Govornmont employe it is neither an unusual nor improper thing to remit the duty of investigation to a Board or Commission of heads of departments — their duty being to ascertain and report the facts, so as to enable Ministers, in the exercise of thoir responsible functions, to arrive at a jnst decision on tho merits. In the presont oase tho evidence, such as it is, against Mr. Do Castro, has been fully brought out in the report of the Royal Commission on the department of which ho was chief clerk. It is difficult to sco how it is to be added to. The whols case is there, with the exception of whatever defence or reply Mr. Do Castro may have to submit. It does not need any new Commission to elicit this._ The Government could readily obtain it, if, indeed, it is not already before them, and on the caso thus completed, it is their bounden duty to accept the responsibility of pronouncing judgment, We have said they oonnot escape this responsibility, nor can they, but they have resorted to the unmanly expedient of setting tip a buffer, in the shapo of Mbssrs. Crombie, Gray, and Smith, to save them in some measure from the consequences of decision. If Mr. Do Castro is to be retained in the sorvioe, they wish to be able to impress the public with the idea that they are not to blame for anything which may happen, and if Mr. De Casjio is to be dismissed, they wish to make him and his friends think it is not their fault. A moro despicable position for a Govornment to assume could not be conceived. They have already acted to some oxtent on the evidence bof ore them , as they have practically superseded Mr. De Castro as Chief Clerk in the Publio Trust office. If they acted hastily or improperly in doing this, they should have tho manliness to admit thoir error and reotify tho injustico done. If, on the other hand, thoy accept the evidence against him to the extent they have already acted upon it, they shduld not even attempt to Shirk ' tho full responsibility of pronouncing a final verdict. Tho course they aro now adopting is a mean and contemptible one, utterly unfair to everyone associated direotly or indirectly with tho unhappy affair. We aro surprised that Messrs. Crombie, Grey, and Smith should havo consented to be placed in suoh an invidious position, or have accopted such an unpleasant and unprecedented task as has been thrust iipon them. Thoy should laot consent to sit in final jndgment on any fellow officer in the public sorvice. That is tho inalienable funotion and duty of Ministers, who aro responsible to Parliament, and through it to tho people. The protection which this responsibility affords to every member of the Civil Servico should not be withdrawn or lessoned by tho interposition of any other tribunal.