The Evening Star SATURDAY, MARCH 22, 1913.

Evening Star, Issue 15139, 22 March 1913, Page 6

The Evening Star SATURDAY, MARCH 22, 1913.

When Mr G. W. Russell puts on his wellworn garb of destructive Mr Russell, criticism he is usually Of Avon. entertaining, if not always instructive. In pursuance of the tactics of self-assertion which distinguished his joint-occupancy of the front.Opposition bench last-session, he has taken upon himself to in the field in replying to Mr Massey. According to the newspaper reports, lie did so to the entire satisfaction of his large (Christchurch) audience, and doubtless-to his own also. Mr Russell does not do things by hakes. The most-rabid partisan could desire no more -sweeping.: denunciations than the member of Avon hurled at Mr Massey and his Government on Wednesday night. It issonevofctfheyfaHlts of political controversy in New Zealand that each combatant endeavors to cover the whole range of politics in one speech, which prevents any one subject being more than scratched -on the surface. Mr Russell followed the usual 'practice, and the expected (with him one might almost say the inevitable) happened—superficiality, highly colored, and attractive for the moment, and filling enough to the easily satisfied. Self-government is one of the serious problems of a workaday world, and its discussion Remands serious thought. Perhaps, as Mr Russell b»hev<;s that our politics have "entered upon an epoch of Cant, Humbug, and Sham," that is the reason he offers, in place of a useful machine, a gaudy toy.

Mr Russell points out that Xew Zealand stock has fallen on tho London market to a greater degree than Victorian or Now South Wales stock, and he blames Mr Mass-y's advent, declaring that the London money lenders do not trust the Massey Government. If one is to be guided by the result of the last two loan transactions, the London money lende.' trusts the Massey Government more than lie trusted the Government of which Mr Russell was a member. However, for the real explanation one has to look a little further back -a little deeper. Tho sharper fact of New Zealand stock on a market weakening from general causes was most probably due to Home investors being apprised of the discovery made bv Mr Russell's colleague, Mr Myers-viz., that despite fairly regular appearances in the role of borrower the >,-ew Zealand Government had verv liHle to go on with. The natural inference was extravagance, and when a lender geN that idea the borrower's credit 1S hound to suffer; and it is a thing wh icl, cannot be lestored m a day. But it will have to be restored, and for that reason we trust that Mr Russell's sneer that " alreadv thev ' (the Government) had found that their onl'v " hope was to try to run the country as "nearly as possible as their predecessors had done" will be utterly falsified. Ji Mr Russell believes his own statement that, so far as he could see, the Government were running very much as before but under a new set of men." what was the reason for his diatribe against themunless, maybe,, his seat has been marked for capture by the "Reformers!" It i s really difficult to know what Mr Russell believes., for in another part of his speech ho said that "the change (of Government) had resulted in no good and much evil " In fact, throughout his speech Mr R usse ll contradicted himself so often and so flaththat it ,s almost a work of supererogation lor anyone else to essay the task of controvert.ng him. He stated that tho Government had climbed into office on promises, one of which was to economise, and another of which was to purify public lite from certain evils which had grown iip-presumably a reference to Public Service reform. He followed this up wiU] the allegation that tlle Governmcnt kept none of their promises, being content, because of timidity, to keep as near as poss.ble to the line followed bv the TUrd and Mackenzie Governments: 1„ a most the next breath Mr Russell complained that the Government had stopped construction work on ten railwavs-a strik mjr enough departure from previous lines and a sufficiently rigorous piece of oZ nomy, surely. As to the pnbUc Commission. Mr Russell's horror was"r M ll v too acute in regard to something whicl, involved no change of moment, according to one ot h,s two reversible outlooks First he upbraids the Government for not carrying out their promised economics and then, when they -set about making economies in the biggest field available to them, and in the most scientific and the fairest manner, Mr Russell regards the an ticpated reduction of £60,000 per annum m the cost of the Civil Service as almost a wicked saving, if one judges his word, aright! But it is altogether too complicated a matter dealing with such a manysided politician as this. If Mr Massey has his limitations Mr Russell has none—abso li.tely none. Doubtless it is because of this that Mr Russell, looking down from his pedestal, sees the Prime Minister as "an honest but incapable man, whose ' ideas were limited to road board matters, who possessed none of the quali- " ties of a statesman, who was timid, hesi"tatin K , and had no breadth of'vision " What, we may ask, is breadth of vision' Is it the taculty for seeing the same object black one moment and white the next? And do Prime Ministers of \ ew Zealand, in esse or in posse, require to be possessed of this enviable and interestintr accomplishment?