The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED DAILY. FRIDAY. DECEMBER 5, 1919.

Gisborne Times, Volume LI, Issue 5346, 5 December 1919, Page 4

The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED DAILY. FRIDAY. DECEMBER 5, 1919.

The address which Sir James Carroll delivered at His Majesty’s Theatre on Wednesday evening was remarkable in that he failed to introduce much that was not previously known. We suppose that the electors will have to rest content with his defence of Sir Joseph Ward’s action in breaking the party truce just on the eve of last session. If the member for Gisborne had gone further into details he would have offended his political master ans. of course, that was a line of procedure that had to be avoided. In short. Sir James Carroll set forth that the Wardist leader did not contravene the letter of the agreement by smashing, on the date he chose, the link that had bound the two parties together over such a long and critical period. Very wisely, from his point of view, the member for Gisborne refrained from touching upon the higher aspects of the matter. His suggestion that it might have been better for the Wardists if thev had remained in the Coalition Government until Bills which had been originally framed by Liberal Ministers were passed was in the nature of a joke, but, indicentally, it provided a flat contradiction of the Hon. W. D. S. MacDonald’s contention that one reason why Sir Joseph Ward was unwilling to continue the partnership any longer was that the Liberal Ministers were dominated in the Coalition by the Reform Ministers. Perhaps it will now. occur to the Wardist general and his officers that it would have been much wiser if, prior to the campaign, they had all arranged to make the same excuse as to why Sir Joseph Ward deserted Mr. Massey at such an awkward juncture! We need only add, with reference to this matter" that we feel that Sir James Carroll appreciates the difficulty in which the Wardists now find themselves on account of their stupid action in going into Opposition before Parliament had passed the necessary measures dealing with the soldiers’ gratuity, soldier settlements, etc., which, it is admitted on every hand, should have been dealt with as nonparty measures. As to the valuable legislation put on the Statute Book by the Reform party Sir James Carroll was almost silent. It is significant, however, that he did not suggest that a single clause in the numerous measures which Mr. Massey’s party has passed should be repealed! Necessarily Sir James Carroll dealt with the all-important problem of the Ligli cost of living and of profiteering. Unfortunately for himself the member for Gisborne made a bad break in dealing with this subject, but it was the only occasion during the meeting on which he let his political master down. “I do not know,’ he said, ‘'that there is any man in New Zealand who can grip the problem and reduce the cost of living.” How unkind to his leader. Sir Joseph Ward, who claims to be able to do anything simply by a wave of his magic wand! It may be recalled that Sir Joseph Ward declared, after the 1913 strike, that he could have settled the whole trouble in a couple of days but even up till the present time lie has not taken tile public into liis confidence as to his “recipe” for ending industrial war. He lias now told the electors that he knows how—to build dwelling-houses that may be profitably let at 10s per week but so far he has built such houses only “on paper.” But we are digressing. Surely Sir Joseph Ward at some time or other has claimed to know how to settle the cost of living problem? Let us refresh Sir James’s failing memory. At Dunedin—on Thursday, November 21st, 1914 to be exact—the Liberal wizard made a speech. “For the best part of twelve months,” he said, “I have been examining ‘a scheme’ and I wash to tell the electors that under that ‘scheme’ the main articles of food could be cheapened and the same system extended to meat, bread and coal without preventing the export of the great bulk of our products or interfering with ‘the man on the land.’ ” It is now six years ago since' the Liberal magician first began to think out his ‘scheme’ but, unfortunately for the long-suffering puolic bo failed to disclose it to the Coalition Government and it still remains a secret locked in bis bosom. As to the restricted policy of publje works which followed the advent of the Great War, Sir James Carroll proved much more chivalrous than the Hon. W. D. S. MacDonald in. that he more openly admitted that it was useless blaming the Reform party. Nor did the member for Gisborne find fault with the Reform party in that land settlement has not proceeded more rapidly in recent years. Iff he had done so it would have been “up to him” to explain why the Wardists, when they were in power, eased off in connection with the acquistion of large estates for closer settlement. Sir James Carroll, it would seem, has swallowed the Liberal leader’s new manifesto without question, and, seeing that it consists, in the main, of bald statements, he contented himself with keeping his foot on ‘‘the soft pedal.” There was much evidence in nis remarks, however, that he was “out”

“His Master’s Voice.”

to tickle the ears of the Laborites. He said “ditto” to bir Joseph Ward’s plea that the whole of the privately-owned coal-mines should be natioalised ; but he did not offer any reasonable excuse why the Liberals should be, so anxious with respect to the housing of miners seem g that that greatly favored section of the workers, earning as it does from £1 to 30s per day per man, should be well able to look after its own pro- i blein of accommodation. In like M manner his suggestion “that militar-' ism has assumed proportions of a honey” was meant to be soothing to the palate of extreme Labonsm. Seeing that so little lias been done by Sir James Carroll to have the Native lands of this Dominion cultivated he could not have been expected to extend support to the Reform party’s scheme to continue the use of indentured labor m Western Sarnn'. in the meantime so that tne plantations might not fall back into a wild state. His claim to have been one of only ten members of the House who opposed even the temporary use of indentured labor in those maybe pleased the “Red ’ section of bis audience, but it showed bow much he is out of sympathy with the general idea that the T 4nrnr.an people should he taught how to he a more useful people than they can ever prove if they are allowed simply to laze away their lives. We prefer to deal m a separate article wRh Sir James Carroll s claim that “somebody must have been on the as to public works matters SEr.Sc i feist Cocct could not have made such wonderful progress” !