The Evening Star THURSDAY, JULY 9, 1914.

Evening Star, Issue 15540, 9 July 1914, Page 4

The Evening Star THURSDAY, JULY 9, 1914.

Last night's division on Sir Joseph Ward's

INo-confidcnce amendThe Government ment came as a merciSurvive. u,l release. There is one consolation—viz., that it. took place as early as it did; there is one matter tor regret —thai it did not terminate ihe Address-in-Beply debate. The amendment gave rise to a very transient flutter—the community had almost forgotten that it had been moved. It also gave rise to two good speeches. Sir Joseph Ward, in moving it, rose to a higher level oi parliamentary debate than ho has reached since crossing the floor of the IS House. He took his rightful place as Leader of the Opposition. Mr James Allen, in reply, made perhaps the best ■I epeeeh he has delivered of recent years, either in or out of Parliament. And with that the interest subsided in such degree that only the terminating division could resuscitate it. As "was only to be expected the Government survived, but their margin ■was less than that which two years ago served to put them into office. It has been the Government's habit to hint that in the interval they have strengthened their position in the House, as well as to assert straight out that they have greatly strengthened it in the country. The division shows that eo far as the House goes they can have no bigger majority than before, and there is tha possibility that occasionally they may have an even slenderer one. Mr Lang has gone to the Speaker's Chair, and Mr Millar evidently prefers not to vote oil crucial divisions. I Mr Clark was another absentee, hut, from J a Whip's point of view, ho was safe for the Government, and only one of those eleventh-hour misunderstandings prevents his name appearing Mow the division list as one. of the " pairs " on the Government side. Yet it would have been moro satis- : factory to all concerned, including the Chalmers electors, had Mr Clark found it convenient to bo in his place when tho division bell rang. His absence, unwelcome, no doubt, to the Government on the fracture of the pairing arrangements made j beforehand, mrst have been even more galling to the Opposition. One of the j avowed objects of the amendment was to pin down the member for Chalmers and to brand him as either Government or Opposition. But ho evaded the rounding-up. Both Mr Rhodes (of Thames) and Mr Vernon Peed remained with the Government, and presumably will do so till the session ends. The Government still have a working majority, and it is for them to use it in pushing their legislation through tho obstruction that is oven now looming in the background. As a test on the House's attitude on tho Government's ■ alleged toy navy policy the division has ] no value. In moving his amendment Kir Joseph Ward sought to make that question tho test one. Put oiteo again party quite obscured this issue. Aud that is ! ono great blot on the party system. A clear-cut vote en nny single- vital question i" the moot difficult thing to obtain j from cither House or rountiy. j

Howkvek much or littio satisfaction the Government may find

Parliament and Naval Defence.

in the result <*/f the vote on Sir J. t.l. Ward's

No - confidence motion, thojo journals and citizens who have felt it their duty to oppose the spirit and purpose- of tho many declarations on Naval Defence made by the Prime Minister and the Minister of "Defence have reasonable grounds for being"'pleased with the, debate which pn-ceded it. The policy of NewZealand Naval Defence, as presented bythese Ministers, is now hopelessly condemned. There was hardly a member on their own side of the House—certainly there has been none of recognised authority—who has had anything to say in its favor. True, the member for Egmont (Mr C. A. Wilkinson) told a listless and (we imagine) slightly amused audience that ho favored a local navy, and that the Japanese Alliance was a rotten reed on which to depend for tho defence of the Pacific. Wo do not expect that the Japanese Government will make the hon. member's expression of opinion a casus belli. British statesmen, who are at least as careful of the interests of the Empire that has been entrusted to their (not our) keeping, think differently from the hon. member, and as it is they who have to bear tho burden of responsibility, their opinion is not without value. And this is what tho First Lord of the Admiralty said in tho House of Commons on March 17 last:

Speaking in 1912, I aaid the Admiralty was prepared to guarantee absolutely the main security of the country and the Empire day by day for the nest two years, and* it' the House will grant ma what I ask for the future that prospect can be indefinitely extended.

The House responded to Mr Churchill's appeal, and approved his record Naval Estimates of 51A millions. Wo suggest, with due respect to the member for Egmont, that he also might rest content with Mr Churchill's assurance and British Naval policy. We believe that a perusal of the First Lord' 3 speech will leave him in a better frame of mind than is tho average New Zealander after reading, in the London 'Times,' such a message as that -which was sent from Wellington on May 23 last:

The Prime Minister, Mr Massey, says that the Anglo-Japanese Treaty of Alliance is not sufficient protection for New Zealand, and therefore New Zealand must do somefhing for herself. His idea was that Canada, Australia, South Africa, New Zealand, and Great Britain should join to- put a great fighting navy ia the Pacific, which, he believed, would yet become the of the great nations.

The abovo is by no means the mosb regrettable of tim ntteratoees that have fallen from Mr Massey and Mr Allen in this relation during the past ( few months. Theanswer thereto is known to every student of the question. It was given in partv by one of Mr Wilkinson's own party during the progress of the debate in 'which ho participated. Mr W. H. D. Bell, the member for Wellington Suburbs, in stating his reasons for disagreeing with the Government's Naval policy (now permanently relegated to the limbo of things that eught-not-to-havo-been-eaid), remarked that one of his three objections was that eycn if , the next war should take place in the Pacific the ships we had would be absolutely inadequate to deal with the situation. We have no hesitation in going even further than Mr Bell by affirming that net Australia, Canada, South Africa, and New Zealand combined can for many, many years hopo to put a fleet hi the Pacific that would have a fighting chance against the might of Japan. Ergo: we must trust that Admiralty which Mr Wilkbison so light-heartedly flouts. We have more than onoo referred in this column to the unfortunate impres:sion of New Zealand's Naval policy that his been created in England and Australia as the direct result of Mr Allen's statements. Nothing hut time and ihe logic of events can counteract it. There is, however, less excuse for Australia than for the Mother Land. A nerusal of responsible New Zealand journals would have saved our Sydney neighbors from committing themselves, as the 'Daily Telegraph' did, to the announcement, more than once repeated; that New Zealand was about to embark on a Naval policy on all-fours with that of the Commonwivuth T)r M'Nab, vo are glad to lean), did his lest to correct this quite mistaken view, end by now there should be little or >;o excuse for still holding it. We v.>;i!d urge upon ou 1 " readers that, apart altogether from loyalty ar.d patriotism and thanks for many past services received, common sense and the selfish instinct of self-pressi-vation must .convince'all that the duty of New Zealand is to submit to and comply with the idvice of the British Admira'iy. Our future will be decided over our heads as far as sea power is concerned, and oit policy is so plain as to admit of no alternative. That weary Titan staggering beneath the too vast orb of his fate, to uje th© words eo aptly applied by the great Imperialist who passed to his Knal rest last week, has burdens enough and to spare without New Zealand adding to th»ni.