THURSDAY, JULY 11, 1912. THE MASSEY MINISTRY.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume LXVIII, Issue LXVIII, 11 July 1912, Page 4

THURSDAY, JULY 11, 1912. THE MASSEY MINISTRY.

Mr Massey's Ministry is the ablest and mosc ueiiio^racie tnat I\eu- z,e<utmu mis haa ior many a day. Tne only man or speciricaiiy distinctive abiiicy in the late Ministry was tne Premier, Mr Xnomas Mackenzie, who was also a member of the Ward Ministry, in which there were other men of ability, including s>ir Josepn Ward himself, ivuMillar, and Sir james Carroll. Siz Jonn i<'iudlay should perhaps be placed in another category—that of an able man, in contradistinction to the maii wno is merely a man of ability; for the terms imply a real difference. An able man is a man with power to originate cliectively; a man of ability, a man who uses things already 'available, for the furtherance of business already in hand. There are minions of men of ability in tne world, but able men are not at all common, and we think that, under a discriminating classification, Sir John Findlay would, m tnis respect, have to be set apart from the other members of the ward Ministry—he as an able man, they as men of ability. In a strict sense, the Mackenzie Government contained no members who could be logically ranked with bir John Findlay under the discrimination here spoken of by us. But the Massey Ministry has at least five able men amongst its nine members, and the other four are all men of ability. Since tiie days ox Sir William bos., Sir Freden.-k Win taker, Sir Julius Vogel, Sir Joiin Hall, Sir George Grey, Sir itobert Stout and Sir Harry Atkinson, New Zealand ' has had no Cabinet' with so many able men in it. Mr Ballanee was an able man, and so" was Sir John McKenzie (notwithstanding the narrowness of his outlook); wnile Mr NY. P. Reeves also was a man of ability, of which Mr Seddon had a'generous share. But it was chiefly by means of his strong will and his human personality that Mr Seddon gained his ascendant authority and retained it; and lie was not an able man in the sense that Sir John Findlay is an able man, or in that in which Mr H. D. Bell and other members of the Massey Government a.re able men, So, we repeat, the Massey Ministry is specifically the ablest that New Zealand has had for many a day. We assert that it is also, in the same sense, the most democratic; for Mr Seddon's was a oneman Government, and so was Sir Joseph Ward's, though in a considerably lessened degree. These Ministries

were, therefore, not truly democratic, but quite essentially autocratic, and their continuance must have led to abuses which it would have taken

many years to remove or destroy. Even as things have been and are, a competent and impartial critic would probably have little difficulty in proving that this has been the case. Indeed, Sir Joseph Ward himself gave one notable piece of public evidence against Mi- Seddon's rule when he showed that the public service could be reduced in numbers by many' hundreds, and in yearly cost' by hundreds of thousands of pounds. It is no answer to say that Mr Sedcton and Sir Joseph did things that were popular or on the lines of Liberal policy, for that has been clone by some of the most autocratic kings known to history, such as Louis the Eleventh of France and Henry the Eighth of England. The Massey Ministry, however, will not be a one-man or autocratic Governuient ;^but a. GpVfcrmßsnt of able men, *md therefore a clemoor^Ufc. Govern-

ment—not a tyranny. Even ili the political sentiment of its members '* "•ill be more democratic than its predecessor, for, with the specific purpose or lessening the cost of lirfcg, it will reduce taxation wherever possible: jH-ing- all the available land of the dominion within the reach of all the people,- improve the conditions and keep down tie cost of the public service,- improve local government, so as to increase its efficiency and make its administration strictly economical- enI courage industry and harmonise the relationships between workers and employers ; democratise the Legislative Council by making it electtve by large constitueneie^s; and substitute prudence and method and justice for their opposites in everything connected with the public revenues and their expenditure. Democratic in its very essence because it comprehends the welfare of all the people, this programme entails loyalty to the principles of democracy in every administrative detail calculated'to cairry it into effect; and collectively and individually, the members of the Ministry are the men to do their duty in all those things with the thoroughness of statesmen whose chief object is to serve their country with advantage to- all its people, which, after all, is the only way in which public men can justify their existence and gain real renowii' for themselves. We believe that the* members of the Massey Ministry personally and individually entertain feelings akin to these, and that it will be found that thoy are all workers, and that not one "f them is a theatrical attitudinist. ■' will be found, too, that—so democratic are they—they have placed 0-3 of the very ablest and' most demo- ' -atic of their group in charge of the " -sgislative Council, so that that Cham-j-t will be led by a man with brains • id sympathies equal to the most •ogressive policy. For mental power ~-h- H. D. Bell has very few equals in 'Te'v Zealand, and it is more than ;-\€nty years since he first gave re of s of his far-reaching Liberalism by proposing radical developments in

tlie death duties, and propounding a scheme for giving employment to settlers without capital in connection with land taken up by themselves. So that, all through, the Massey Ministry is likely to become known as one of the most thoroughly democratic in New Zealand history, or in that of Australasia—democratic in its principles and democratic in the details of its administration.