Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
This article displays in one automatically-generated column. View the full page to see article in its original form.


The ex-Minister for Education has spoken, and a brief summary of his speech has been telegraphed to us. It would be unfair to pronounce on his speech whilst we have only before us such disjointed fragments of it as have been communicated by the electric wires. But even from so little it may be gleaned that there have been stormy feuds in the Cabinet, and that he —Mr Fisher was regarded as the Jonah who had to be jettisoned to save the Ministerial vessel. Assuredly some of the causes of contention are stupendously petty. That Mr Mitchelson should pretend to resign the office of Public Works because he and Mr Fisher differed about a trumpery railway crossing is excessively ludicrous. It appears that the same gentleman and Mr Fisher came to loggerheads about some question relating to a printing office contract. Surely men holding responsible office as the administrators of the Colony should not be capable of squabbling like fishwives about such paltry matters. Then, again, there is a dark mystery attached to the Gasparini affair. Some one of his colleagues was guilty, heavers, of "inconceivable duplicity" in connection with this matter, and the anguish was piled up and rendered more so by the bitter remembrance of the efforts he had made to " keep " the offender in the Cabinet in its early " stage." This was " the unkindest cut of all." Our political quidnuncs will be on the qui vive when Mr Fisher unbosoms himself in the House. Unfortunately for him, as for any man in his position, the public are not easily moved to take part in personal quarrels between colleagues. The interest displayed by the multitude in such cases is pretty much on a level with that they show at a dog-fight. They enjoy what they are pleased to call " the fun," but they do not care one pin for the combatants. There must be some cause of quarrel affecting themselves to elicit any real sympathy. Like Mr Aminadab Sleek they " deeply sympathise," and there it ends. Into the merits of his speech, apart from this, we do not propose to enter until we have the full text before us. Only one thing in the mutilated report demands immediate attention, and that is the question propounded by him apparently in all sincerity—"What " would we do if Sir Harry Atkinson "died 1 ?" The "one-man" policy, he says, cannot last for ever. Well, we should get on without the " one man." Similar questions were asked about Peel and Palmerston and Wellington and divers others; and history has answered them. With the necessity of the time there always comes the man.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

Bibliographic details

THE EX-MINISTER OF EDUCATION., Evening Star, Issue 7925, 5 June 1889

Word Count

THE EX-MINISTER OF EDUCATION. Evening Star, Issue 7925, 5 June 1889